The Yamaha NS-5000 has some interesting design features which have been developed using similar software tools and processes (in my understanding). And Yamaha has access to far more in-house resources than many other audio manufacturers
@René - Acculution.com what is your view of some of these engineering approaches - novel or innovative? Interested in your informed opinion.
Well, there is a bit to unpack here... Specifically for this loudspeaker there are some interesting technology going on, and they actually illustrate the functionality via animations from simulations. Nice. But some companies are even better at showing off their simulation work, such as KEF, Harman/Samsung US, and a few others, and make YouTube videos and present at different venues. Now, the innovations that we see are typically not born out of simulations; the resonator/"meta"-material stuff behind the drivers are first investigated via analytical work (it is often fairly basic) and later validated via simulations, which also makes it easier to sell to management as you can show these nice looking animations, and they can also be used directly in sales material, and to educate fellow engineers.
Now, where simulations really can LEAD the innovation is topics such as design of composite materials (layers of anisotropic materials),
and formal mathematical optimization (parametric, shape, topology),
where you simply have to let the computer run (with you guidance) and see where you end up, iterate from there, contemplate, and so on. I work with these techniques with some companies that have enough foresight to see that is where the industry is heading anyway, and so better partner up with someone who already has experience in the field than try and build it in-house.
When it comes to these new innovations in large companies, it is perhaps worth noting it is typically the same 1-3 people coming up with them, though they may be 10-20 times that in the respective department. I have worked in several companies (not just loudspeaker) and a major issue is that the average engineer has let go of a lot of knowledge acquired in uni; complex numbers are an issue, signal processing is not well-understood, basic acoustic and solid mechanics posed problems, structuring reports, the scientific approach in general, working from first principles, and so on. This can give an unfortunate dynamic in a company, especially if management is not investing in year-round knowledge and competence sustaining/building, and that creates a divide between those who are constantly chipping away at fundamental and new skills, and those who have mentally replaced "I am not using what I learned" with "I don't need to use what I learned, because my fellow engineers are not using it either". I have worked with a coach some years back to figure out how to lift departments, looking into biases and fallacies, but it became too much of a hazzle. But this is a whole other can of worms...