Grimm Audio LS1BE- why so expensive?

[Purité Audio]

I do not read it this way. It is true that the "white paper" is written in a convincing tone, rings some bells in that it reaches out a bit further into tech-territory than typical hifi-magazines.

But ... not my cup of tea, too light and in parts plain irrelevant as to justify the price of the finished product (first version already), which is deliberately described as "high end".

Did KEF do wrong? The wide baffle thing, rounded edges (not needed on top, how special!) etc., using the SEAS DTX etc, good driver motor for the bass etc., that doesn't make an outstanding speaker.

The industrial design is it. I like it! Kudos to the designer. Some people buy sofas for their design, and are happy even if it is expensive. More so, the high cost makes it literally exclusive. There is fun in saying: "Me have it, You not!"

That was it from my side.

The LS1 is based firmly on sound engineering Kef Like many companies tread the line between engineering and domestically acceptable.
Keith

 

[thewas]

But ... not my cup of tea, too light and in parts plain irrelevant as to justify the price of the finished product (first version already), which is deliberately described as "high end".

In the end it is a good looking hifi loudspeaker where you pay extra for the looks compared to an utilitarian monitor. It is also not my cup of tea, but I would not jump to say it does not make sense for another target group.

Did KEF do wrong?

No, but if you want a KEF with directivity going down as low you need a Blade which is also not cheap (I would personally prefer it though to the Grimm), everything is a compromise and a choice.

 

[fineMen]

The LS1 is based firmly on sound engineering Kef Like many companies tread the line between engineering and domestically acceptable.
Keith

This statement I cannot prove.

... for another target group.
... KEF with directivity going down as low ...

Directivity is a matter of taste according to the Olive score. It will change the timbre, and to the shock of many, not much more. The same as with bookshelf speaker mounted in a--bookshelf.

Why do You care about a "target group"? Are Yo a professional market observer, who then suggests retail prices? A product manager?

I'm spoiling Your fun with the hobby, sorry. Too come back to the original question: why don't You ask Grimm themselves? Drop them an e-mail.

 

[oivavoi]

I absolutely do not tempt to pick on You.

More generally I see that most people here miss the idea of the spinorama and subsequent speaker assessment by objective rules. The "circle of confusion" isn't understood. The essence of a recording isn't understood.

I understand that this is a hobby, owning, discussing, buying again for improvements. As opposed to that, I'm happy with the idea that there is an end, namely having a spinorama approved speaker of appropriate size. Conflict, right?

What brought me up here is a wording like "mind blowing" when describing the performance of a humble, too small, otherwise just halfway correct speaker.

Yeah, stereo tricks ones brain as You said - in making people buy too expensive stuff for no good reason to only worsen things.

No worries, no offense taken. That said, my hunch is that you place too much faith in how far the spinorama approach or preference score takes us into determining what speakers are "best" for individual listeners in individual rooms. I'm very much a hobbyist here, but my day job is to read and do research in a different field, so I try to approach this hobby with a scientific mindset (coupled with my individual preference). I'll go out on a limb and assume that I've probably read more published works in audio science than hou have. Sorry if that assumption is wrong. But the preference score does not do a good job of distinguishing between wide and narrow dispersion for example, which has a major effect on perception.

In audio science there are some things which are fairly settled, and some things which are definitely not. This is a long discussion, but briefly: it is not controversial at all that somewhat wide directivity creates a pleasant feeling of spaciousness for most listeners, and that reflections are less disturbing when they are spectrally correct. This is well covered in Toole's book, but there is much other material as well. So the general design approach of the LS1 is in line with research, arguably more in line with preference studies than the more narrow directivity one finds in some other constant directivity speakers.

What one cannot conclusively claim from research in the LS1 design is the importance they place on diffraction with regards to imaging. Here there are not many studies, but the idea in itself is not without merit. The importance they place on distortion (berylllium tweeter and excellent amplifiers), or jitter (dacs), is generally not supported by published research. That's probably partly about attracting rich audiophiles, I assume. But then again, why not strive for perfection if one can and has customers who will pay for it.

 

[thewas]

Directivity is a matter of taste according to the Olive score.

Which was computed using a limited bandwidth of typical narrow baffle loudspeakers... According to Toole by the way for stereo configuration wide directivity is often preferred... Also the score favours a smooth directivity so not one with a kink (no directivity up to frequency X and only after then increasing suddenly)...

Why do You care about a "target group"? Are Yo a professional market observer, who then suggests retail prices? A product manager?

??? I couldn't care less, but who are you to judge it and doing such questionable assumptions?

I'm spoiling Your fun with the hobby, sorry.

Am wondering how do you come to such weird conclusions? As said I couldn't care less what you think about the Grimms, I don't even own or plan to own them, I just try to analyse the reasons for their existence and success.

Too come back to the original question: why don't You ask Grimm themselves? Drop them an e-mail.

Why should I ask them? For me their concept and target is crystal clear, for you it seems its not, so feel free to ask them.

 

[Tangband]

Ok, I'll try: for one it achieves controlled and moderatlely wide directivity. It achieves this primarily with the wide and contoured baffle. This kind of directivity creates strong imaging but at the same time a pleasant feeling of spaciousness, given the spectrally correct field of reflections. Controlled directivity is not unique for thr LS1, of course. But its directivity is wider than that of the Kii3 or the 8C or the Genelecs (I think - writing from memory here).

Bass is very good for the size of the speaker.

Frequency response very good, no resonances to speak of etc.

Drivers which work very well for their intended purpose.

Active crossover - probably has benefits - and light use of DSP which doesn't "overcorrect".

Everything else is top-notch, though the audibility of all of that is very much up for debate - amps, dac, jitter, etc.

Pleasing to the eye, which fools our foolish brains/ears into thinking the sound is also more beautiful.

All in all it's a complete package which really does most things right. (the designer Bruno lays out the rationale for the first version here: https://pdf4pro.com/view/ls1-l2-grimm-audio-5aed63.html)

I very much doubt, however, that one would be able to hear differences between the BE version and the first version. I may be wrong of course, but that's my hunch.

And it's very expensive. So why not just buy the Kii3, the D&D 8C or Genelecs? Having listened to all of these speakers many times I do think that the LS1 is one step up. That assessment is all sighted and may be heavily biased, but that was my impression. Many people also find the LS1 more pleasing to the eye, which may or may not be important for the purchasing decision.

Would I buy it if I had the money? Probably. A man gotta allow himself some pleasures, and I'm a non-drinking vegan who doesn't drive or fly, so there's not that many vices for me left, other than spending obscene money on unnecessary audio thingies. But for the foreseeable future it will probably remain out of my price range.

Ofcourse there should better sounding loudspeakers than Genelec 8361, this GRIMM with a subwoofer is probably better, but one has to compare in the same room to be sure. One other example that might be even better is the Linn Akudorik exakt dsp for about 20000 dollars.

Below 10000 dollars the 8361 seems to be hard to beat.

The GRIMM loudspeaker is in a way a compromise - because a 8 inch midrange and a 1 inch tweeter do have compomises in the directivity and the crossover. A four way active loudspeaker overcomes those problems, where a 3 inch midrange can be used.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

Since ASR, I know that excellent performance can be had for not too much money. The curve of excellence is however not linear... You don't go on paying more and more to get better results.. there is such a thing as the laws of diminishing returns... I remains however that some products perform objectively at a level that is superior to other products costing less. Then... they cost, what they cost. I am not sure for example that you can reach the performance of pair of 8361 + W371A or of a Kii 3 + BXT or a pair of Revel Salon 2 for less than their asking price/cost... Some will claim that they can DIY such performances but, those who can and are into DIY know how difficult it could be or how much it would cost... to not make the endeavor viable.
Is this Grimm speaker at that level objective performance level of those (8361 + W371A, Revel Salon 2, Kii + BXT, etc)?... I frankly don't know, but if it is then.. its price could be deemed fair. If you can't or don't want to, pay, then, this is another story

Peace.

 

[oivavoi]

Ofcourse there should better sounding loudspeakers than Genelec 8361, this GRIMM with a subwoofer is probably better. One other example better than Genelec 8361 is the Linn Akudorik exakt dsp for about 20000 dollars.

Below 10000 dollars the 8361 seems to be hard to beat.

Focal trio 11be? Very different directivity, seems excellent (haven't listened to it). If someone does a blind shootout between them and the 8361 my assumption/hypothesis is that some would prefer the Genelecs, some the Focals, with "regular listeners" probsbly gravitating towards the focals. Mesanovic rtm10 is also just below 10000 usd, seems excellent, and ticks some of the same boxes as the trio 11be. Neumann also makes excellent speakers with a directivity which is close to the Genelecs.

I'm otherwise somewhat skeptical of pronouncing some loudspeakers as "the one to beat" - individual preferemce for directivity, musical material, and placement of loudspeakers and listening position will have a major effect on what works best in individual situations

 

[Tangband]

Focal trio 11be? Very different directivity, seems excellent (haven't listened to it). If someone does a blind shootout between them and the 8361 my assumption/hypothesis is that some would prefer the Genelecs, some the Focals, with "regular listeners" probsbly gravitating towards the focals. Mesanovic rtm10 is also just below 10000 usd, seems excellent, and ticks some of the same boxes as the trio 11be. Neumann also makes excellent speakers with a directivity which is close to the Genelecs.

I'm otherwise somewhat skeptical of pronouncing some loudspeakers as "the one to beat" - individual preferemce for directivity, musical material, and placement of loudspeakers and listening position will have a major effect on what works best in individual situations

True , but with active constructions you can change many things according to the room and get a much better sound than a passive construction. I havent heard the Focal trio 11be.

 

[Mnyb]

.... because thier customers are willing to pay this.
So the question should really be why are people willing to pay this price are they this good ?

Pricing products is an interesting topic in itself.
A sure way to bankruptcy is to jus multiply BOM with a small factor .
Price is based on some useful utility and/or perceived value the customers experience , is it not ?

High End is a bit sad regarding this for a couple of reasons.


A high price is a virtue signal in itself in a perverse way :/

The small numbers of rich audiophiles pursuing “the best” is very finicky and due to heard mentality is always on the move to next best thing . So sales will vary widly and you don’t really know if someone buying it in couple of years.
The irrationality is staggering compared even to normal human whimsy.

So the risk overhead brands in the high end needs is enormous. I would not even try this business.

They work more like coach/buggy builders of the 19 century . I think even the kef blade is built on order when you buy it.

Even if Genelec is expensive at thier top end there is a consistent need in the pro audio field that is somewhat predictable.

 

[fineMen]

So the risk overhead brands in the high end needs is enormous. I would not even try this business.

They work more like coach/buggy builders of the 19 century . I think even the kef blade is built on order when you buy it.

Even if Genelec is expensive at thier top end there is a consistent need in the pro audio field that is somewhat predictable.

+1

 

[Eetu]

One other example that might be even better is the Linn Akudorik exakt dsp for about 20000 dollars.

The Akudorik has a single 6.5" woofer, you probably meant Akubarik. I wouldn't bet on it since none of the Linn speakers measured in Stereophile did great.

 

[DWI]

More generally I see that most people here miss the idea of the spinorama and subsequent speaker assessment by objective rules. The "circle of confusion" isn't understood. The essence of a recording isn't understood.

I understand that this is a hobby, owning, discussing, buying again for improvements. As opposed to that, I'm happy with the idea that there is an end, namely having a spinorama approved speaker of appropriate size. Conflict, right?

I suppose I'm a hobbyist, have used about 5 or 6 pairs of speakers over 35+ years and have never had buyer's remorse or experienced a circle of confusion. I've had several pairs over 10 years and will certainly have my present speakers for many years. The only pair of speakers I changed for performance reasons was because of relatively poor low-volume performance, although my wife was upset because she liked the look of them. Changes have been due to moving house, needing wall-mounted speakers with little children and for aesthetic reasons after renovations.

There seems to be this idea that people aren't capable of making reliable subjective decisions. Not my experience.

The tonality and balance of the sound has been very consistent over the years, with one exception. Even if I understood spinorama, it would be of little use as so few domestically acceptable speakers have been measured with it. Mainly KEF and Revel so far as I can see.

A collection of loudspeakers measurements

Some people buy sofas for their design, and are happy even if it is expensive. More so, the high cost makes it literally exclusive. There is fun in saying: "Me have it, You not!"

What rubbish! People I know buy furnishings, artwork, all that kind of stuff because it gives them pleasure, not for bragging rights. Most of our furniture and furnishings are hand made, my wife loves choosing woods and fabrics, doing the design, we've used the same cabinet maker for 30 years and it lasts a lifetime. Everything is unique. Many people do these crafts as a hobby and it is intensely satisfying. We go to lots of craft and art fairs, buy mainly ceramics, sometimes from the studio, get to know everyone from students to established artists from all corners of the world. They are trying to make a living just like everyone else, and often it is not easy. Prices have to be sensible to sell enough to make a living. Bought a lovely piece this weekend for rather less than the price of a Topping amplifier.

 

[fineMen]

... spinorama, it would be of little use as so few domestically acceptable speakers ...

That wasn't my point at all. The spinorama defines a measurement specification. Thus, a loudspeaker is objectively described, and can be evaluated.
If everyone involved uses good speakers in this sense, then there is no room for subjectiveness. It is also guaranteed that the production of the program and listening take place under equivalent conditions.

Only then can a producer sensibly optimize the recording for a beautiful sound.

In turn, therefore, a loudspeaker that is "better" than the standard is actually worse. Simply because it deviates.

(ref: Siegfried Linkwitz has admitted that his dipoles are "better", namely for raw in-ear recordings, but for studio recordings ordinary studio speakers are more suitable.)

That's why my question remained unanswered, what makes the LS1 different, and what results in being better.

The answer to the question of why I don't get an answer is that the matter is not understood. Because it's just fun to talk about loudspeakers. As if you had a clue, be a real expert. As if you just wanted to spend $30,000 on stuff like that. Imagine it, and live through the agony of choice with relish.

And that's only possible if you leave a bit of a subjective element. Otherwise, the highly scientific discourse would become ridiculous.

... lots of craft and art fairs, buy mainly ceramics, ...

I was talking about industrial design and construction. I'm a consultant for artists and designers myself. Tech stuff, legal stuff, financial stuff.

 

[bo_knows]

That wasn't my point at all. The spinorama defines a measurement specification. Thus, a loudspeaker is objectively described, and can be evaluated.
If everyone involved uses good speakers in this sense, then there is no room for subjectiveness. It is also guaranteed that the production of the program and listening take place under equivalent conditions.

Only then can a producer sensibly optimize the recording for a beautiful sound.

In turn, therefore, a loudspeaker that is "better" than the standard is actually worse. Simply because it deviates.

(ref: Siegfried Linkwitz has admitted that his dipoles are "better", namely for raw in-ear recordings, but for studio recordings ordinary studio speakers are more suitable.)

That's why my question remained unanswered, what makes the LS1 different, and what results in being better.

The answer to the question of why I don't get an answer is that the matter is not understood. Because it's just fun to talk about loudspeakers. As if you had a clue, be a real expert. As if you just wanted to spend $30,000 on stuff like that. Imagine it, and live through the agony of choice with relish.

And that's only possible if you leave a bit of a subjective element. Otherwise, the highly scientific discourse would become ridiculous.

I was talking about industrial design and construction. I'm a consultant for artists and designers myself. Tech stuff, legal stuff, financial stuff.

"In turn, therefore, a loudspeaker that is "better" than the standard is actually worse. Simply because it deviates."
I disagree with you on this. There is no standard in-studio industry for the speakers that I'm aware of. As you mentioned before "circle of confusion".
If the speaker measures better, then it's "better" and will play the signal more accurately than the "studio reference".
So if the studio engineer can directly compare those two speakers, then he/she may be blown away by the performance of the "better" speaker. It's a matter of exposure.
Now for the "Grimm Audio LS1BE- why so expensive" question, I would say one needs to answer this question with the audition of the speaker. Forget the objective charts and measurements, and just listen. Because once you write the check for $30.000 plus, your ears better be in audio heaven. It doesn't really matter how good the speaker measures if your ears (and eyes) are not happy with it. I don't need to be a scientist or engineer to find the speakers that sound good to my ears subjectively.
In the hi-end audio context, people spend more money on exotic speaker cables and interconnects than the cost of these speakers.

 

[DWI]

That wasn't my point at all. The spinorama defines a measurement specification. Thus, a loudspeaker is objectively described, and can be evaluated.
If everyone involved uses good speakers in this sense, then there is no room for subjectiveness. It is also guaranteed that the production of the program and listening take place under equivalent conditions.

I've heard various monitors in stereo systems, like the PMC MB2 SE for one example, which is basically a consumer version of a very popular monitor for decades. Subjectively, it's the last thing I would want in my house. Gives me a headache and listening sessions can be quite tiring. I know what I like subjectively and I don't want to be told by a computer. That's worked for me for decades with successful long-term decisions.

Many dealers do listening sessions, these are sociable and informative, in that over the years you get a good idea of the sound from different brands. So when I come to choose a pair of speakers I've got a pretty good idea where I'm going. My dealer uses a pair of Focal at home and he loaned me a pair for home use, from the Utopia range, and after two days they had driven me nuts, but I fully understand why people like them. We went for a pair of speakers that I'm sure measure exceptionally well (never with Spinorama), but which I can listen to for hours on end if I wish.

I've been to thousands of concerts and recitals and I know that live acoustic music can be fatiguing. If I wanted to get as close to live performance as possible, I'd only go to live performances. That's my wife's experience, and several friends who go almost every day, sometimes twice a day, rarely listening to music at home. Recorded music for me is not the same thing as live music and is subjective based on how I like music to sound at home.

I know for example, from listening to various PMC SE speakers using uncompressed master files, what a percussion solo can sound like from a good pair of speakers. I know my speakers cannot produce that sound and I am truly grateful they can't. That's why I chose them. The Focal Utopias could get closer. You might need PMC or Genelec to master that recording, but I for one do not want that sound in my house. I want a tamer version, but which is still musically satisfying. A friend of mine finds the speakers too tame, but that's his subjective taste.

There is a thing about speakers, some seem to give a coherent sound like live music, some seem to dissect music in an unnatural way. The Focal dissected the music. It's a quite clear thing my brain tells me. I don't need measurements to tell me that and I don't know what measurements would. My brain can assess and make a clear analysis of this issue.

No amount of science, engineering and measurements will explain why different people's brains process sound differently. Why does my wife's brain react so negatively to most jazz? Why do I hate deep bass? As far as I'm concerned the ability to make a subjective decision is a good sign that my brain is still working and I will not be dictated to by some computer program.

I was talking about industrial design and construction. I'm a consultant for artists and designers myself. Tech stuff, legal stuff, financial stuff.

You were talking about high cost, exclusivity and bragging rights.

Sure, some things are expensive, our sofa was expensive, depends in part on production costs and the supply chain as well as marketing and retail costs, but a piece of hand made ceramic or glass is unique and often extremely affordable. My son is a product designer, currently working on speaker products.

 

[Purité Audio]

I rather like deep bass.
Keith

 

[oivavoi]

I've heard various monitors in stereo systems, like the PMC MB2 SE for one example, which is basically a consumer version of a very popular monitor for decades. Subjectively, it's the last thing I would want in my house. Gives me a headache and listening sessions can be quite tiring. I know what I like subjectively and I don't want to be told by a computer. That's worked for me for decades with successful long-term decisions.

Many dealers do listening sessions, these are sociable and informative, in that over the years you get a good idea of the sound from different brands. So when I come to choose a pair of speakers I've got a pretty good idea where I'm going. My dealer uses a pair of Focal at home and he loaned me a pair for home use, from the Utopia range, and after two days they had driven me nuts, but I fully understand why people like them. We went for a pair of speakers that I'm sure measure exceptionally well (never with Spinorama), but which I can listen to for hours on end if I wish.

I've been to thousands of concerts and recitals and I know that live acoustic music can be fatiguing. If I wanted to get as close to live performance as possible, I'd only go to live performances. That's my wife's experience, and several friends who go almost every day, sometimes twice a day, rarely listening to music at home. Recorded music for me is not the same thing as live music and is subjective based on how I like music to sound at home.

I know for example, from listening to various PMC SE speakers using uncompressed master files, what a percussion solo can sound like from a good pair of speakers. I know my speakers cannot produce that sound and I am truly grateful they can't. That's why I chose them. The Focal Utopias could get closer. You might need PMC or Genelec to master that recording, but I for one do not want that sound in my house. I want a tamer version, but which is still musically satisfying. A friend of mine finds the speakers too tame, but that's his subjective taste.

There is a thing about speakers, some seem to give a coherent sound like live music, some seem to dissect music in an unnatural way. The Focal dissected the music. It's a quite clear thing my brain tells me. I don't need measurements to tell me that and I don't know what measurements would. My brain can assess and make a clear analysis of this issue.

You got me curious, which speakers do you have?

 

[Eetu]

a pair of speakers that I'm sure measure exceptionally well

If you were so sure you would have named them

 

[MattHooper]

What rubbish! People I know buy furnishings, artwork, all that kind of stuff because it gives them pleasure, not for bragging rights. Most of our furniture and furnishings are hand made, my wife loves choosing woods and fabrics, doing the design, we've used the same cabinet maker for 30 years and it lasts a lifetime. Everything is unique. Many people do these crafts as a hobby and it is intensely satisfying. We go to lots of craft and art fairs, buy mainly ceramics, sometimes from the studio, get to know everyone from students to established artists from all corners of the world. They are trying to make a living just like everyone else, and often it is not easy. Prices have to be sensible to sell enough to make a living. Bought a lovely piece this weekend for rather less than the price of a Topping amplifier.

Agreed. Especially if we are talking about enthusiast pursuits, e.g. audio equipment, the "people just buy for bragging rights" is one of the most over-used tropes there is. Since the 90's I've met and known audiophiles from rich to poor who have owned cheap stuff to many hundreds of thousands of dollars, and I've never met one who wasn't in to it because they had a true passion and felt their equipment was meeting that passion.

There is a thing about speakers, some seem to give a coherent sound like live music, some seem to dissect music in an unnatural way. The Focal dissected the music.

FWIW, that's exactly how several Focal speakers struck me when I auditioned them. But, hey, horses for courses...