Most beautiful speakers in the world ?

[ryanosaur]

If that is the case, you shouldn't have replied, to what I replied to Wolf.

Then report me.

 

[Pearljam5000]

 

[Lekha]

View attachment 448490

Some more images, please.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Some more images, please.

 

[HeadDoc12]

Pitt&GiblinView attachment 448277View attachment 448278View attachment 448279View attachment 448280View attachment 448281View attachment 448282View attachment 448283View attachment 448284View attachment 448285View attachment 448286View attachment 448287View attachment 448288View attachment 448289View attachment 448290View attachment 448291View attachment 448292View attachment 448293View attachment 448294View attachment 448295View attachment 448296View attachment 448297View attachment 448298View attachment 448299View attachment 448300View attachment 448301View attachment 448302View attachment 448303View attachment 448304View attachment 448305View attachment 448306

I know many (all?) of these are active designs. I would LOVE to see a proper spinorama! This site needs an eccentric billionaire who cares more about sound quality than starving children!

 

[HeadDoc12]

Quint Audio PostRetro DIY kit, employing a Radian coax with a 3 Inch beryllium tweeter and acoustic 72dB crossover filters.

View attachment 448352

View attachment 448353

View attachment 448354

Cool looking, but coaxial driver plus exposed beryllium equals toxicity to go with your music?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Lorenzo Audio

 

[Eurasian]

I’m reposting the speaker again because I have a question that has been occasionally spinning around in my mind.

It’s the Waveform Mach Solo:

View attachment 447294

As I’ve said, it was one of the best loudspeakers I’ve ever heard in my room.
Still kind of haunts me. For many years afterwards, I owned a pair of the Waveform Mach MC monitors, which is just the egg portion with the mid range and tweeter, though with a port on the back helping extend bass response. Just like the larger Mach Solo, they came closer than any other loudspeaker to the “ disappearing and imaging” qualities of my MBL omnis that I owned. Plus the Mach Solo was just super dynamic and very “ live” sounding.

So here’s a fantasy that is never going to happen, but I’d like people to chime in as to whether it is plausible or not:

I imagine getting a hold of one of these Mach Solo speakers, and if I had stupid money to throw at it, I asked some talented speaker designer to do a hot rod version: for instance, upgrade all the drivers to the very best available or possible. And I assume that would mean re-jigging the crossover.

For instance, I seem to really like the sound of the SEAS excel drivers, so I wonder about replacing them with those… or something else that’s also more modern and might be more high-performance.

So what would be involved with that? What are the chances of improving the design by hot rodding it that way?

Would it be a hassle trying to find drivers that fit within the existing driver holes in that speaker?

Or is that something where it would make sense to have a speaker designer just copy the design, and expand whatever is needed to accommodate new drivers?

Weren’t these fully active speakers originally? I have a vague recollection that they were sold with Bryston crossovers and amplification

 

[MattHooper]

Lorenzo Audio View attachment 448508View attachment 448509View attachment 448510View attachment 448511View attachment 448512View attachment 448513View attachment 448514View attachment 448515View attachment 448516View attachment 448517View attachment 448518View attachment 448519View attachment 448520

I believe those were posted before. But that’s the type of bling I like in a speaker. Some really beautiful stuff. Reminds me of the craftsmanship of days gone by.

 

[MattHooper]

Weren’t these fully active speakers originally? I have a vague recollection that they were sold with Bryston crossovers and amplification

That was the earlier flagship Mach 17.

The demo John Otvos of Waveform gave me of those speakers in his home was head spinning. Something of a formative experience.

The Mach Solo was a smaller scale speaker that only required a single amplifier. Hence “solo” in the name.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Credo Audio

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Once a non-elastic cone (material) reaches its breakup frequency (e.g., 1.2 kHz in this case), it cannot bounce back, and its integrity suffers a significant blow. Once that occurs, it is no longer the cone it was prior to that event. It is a damaged cone, even if the damage is not visible to the naked eye. One might attempt to assist that cone by changing electrical components, but you are still using a damaged cone (material).

You are making a massive logic error. What was the frequency response of the cone driver prior to that event? Nobody knows, of course - you have to put signal through that cone driver first, and after that event frequency response emerge for the first time, revealing eventual cone breakups. Every other measuring frequency response of that cone driver will bring the same frequency response as the first measurement! So, the cone is not "damaged" - it is its natural working condition for next years/decades of use. Or, you are intending to "use" cone drivers without putting signal through it (i.e. not listening to music), to not damage the cone and to maintain the original cone integrity?!

 

[Lekha]

You are making a massive logic error. What was the frequency response of the cone driver prior to that event? Nobody knows, of course - you have to put signal through that cone driver first, and after that event frequency response emerge for the first time, revealing eventual cone breakups. Every other measuring frequency response of that cone driver will bring the same frequency response as the first measurement! So, the cone is not "damaged" - it is its natural working condition for next years/decades of use. Or, you are intending to "use" cone drivers without putting signal through it (i.e. not listening to music), to not damage the cone and to maintain the original cone integrity?!

That is, if you know / understand sopromat.
Once a non-elastic material passes its critical breaking point under load...and still not yet broken...while under kinetic load...

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

That is, if you know / understand sopromat.

Yes, I have studied "Strength of Materials" in University and I know/understand it, because I passed the exam. You don't (obviously) and you don't understand it.


When Google translate tries to translate from nonlogical original sentence, than this is the result:

Once a non-elastic material passes its critical breaking point under load...and still not yet broken...while under kinetic load...

Nonsense...

 

[Lekha]

Yes, I have studied "Strength of Materials" in University and I know and understand it, because I passed the exam.

Well, it is not "Strength of Materials," so you didn't. And, your 2nd line confirms that.
Google translate won't tell you what it is...

 

[Lekha]

To bring in some good vibes...

Duetta Top
Hand made in 2016

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

Well, it is not "Strength of Materials," so you didn't.
Google translate won't tell you what it is...

This Russian site says exactly "Strength of Materials" in original in English, without Google translate, so you are wrong and I am right:

sopromat.org
http://en.sopromat.org

СОПРОМАТ (sopromat) is a russian slang word and it means STRENGTH OF MATERIALS. I'm russian. That is why ...

In my University, in my language, that subject is called "Technical Mechanic". And yes, I passed that exam. You didn't.

 

[Lekha]

This Russian site says exactly "Strength of Materials" in original in English, without Google translate, so you are wrong and I am right:

In my University, in my language, that subject is called "Technical Mechanic". And yes, I passed that exam. You didn't.

You may have passed "Technical Mechanic," but that's not Sopromat, which is the reason you won't understand simple things. Anyway, this is off topic, so open a new thread on that subject.
(Actually, it should be Technical Mechanics, in your language.)

 

[Lekha]

To bring in good vibes...on topic...

Nice looking, but no idea of its name.

 

[Vladimir Filevski]

You may have passed "Technical Mechanic," but that's not Sopromat,

It is. You don't know what is inside that subject which I studied.

(Actually, it should be Technical Mechanics, in your language.)

Yes, that is correct English translation, with "s" in the word "Mechanics" (in my language correct is without "s") - I made lapsus calami, because I don't use Google translate, ever. All my grammar mistakes are just mine. All your technical/science ignorance is yours only.