-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
The REAL Problem of March Audio's Sointuva WG (Review, Measurements and Reinforcements with Klippel device)
- Thread starter Nuyes
- Start date
The same fastener can be used for both types of applications, in thin material the rubber compress behind the material, in a blind hole it expands outwards. They all rely on bolt torque being sufficient to hold. When using different torque amounts for different bolts, a simple mistake during assembly could be more problematic with this kind of fixing.
fluid ... that's fine if the shaft isn't longer than the drilled material as it is in this particular application. Makes the fig.5 in your example too touchy for achieving a proper torque value. You would never achieve that fig.5 "look" in this application considering the baffle thickness and insert length. The inserts shaft, before the rubber shoulder, is longer than the hole is deep. That difference allows the insert to move in the hole. It's just the wrong fastener choice for this application.
The schematic is illustrative, not a precise technical drawing. While @fluid ninja'd me nicely, I saw similar—but not identical—illustrations on product sheets from various suppliers. At least today I learned about "well nuts"
But I'm not following your precise argument: are you saying the fastener used is too long, or too short?
It's not complicated ... the shaft section of the insert, above the rubber shoulder, has to be a little shorter than the thickness of the material the hole is drilled in. The rubber has to expand against the back side of the material in order for the insert to be held in place (trapped). In this case the insert is too long. Even though the rubber section is expanded, the insert can still move in the hole .. no torque of the driver to the baffle is achieved. From the pic's it looks like you can push the back of the driver out about an 1/8" after the fastener is fully tightened.
Last edited:
Assuming the EPDM sleeve is a close match to the hole diameter, compressing it with sufficient torque appears to work whether the nut is within or through the hole (based on product sheet guidance). Which image is telling you the loose driver story? Your suggestion of 3 mm play seems unlikely.
Edit: going back to have a look was interesting: at post #2 the OP says "There was no sealing at all at the binding posts, and I could literally see some light coming from the gaps between the binding posts and the speaker enclosure." Along with some videos demonstrating sonics. But I can see (and later posts by others describe this) that light is coming through the hollow binding post, not the between the post and the enclosure. hence better performance with banana plugs. It may be the translator, isn't helping but I think imprecise descriptions and inferences confound the OP's analysis in several places.
Last edited:
Not talking about the diameter .. the length of the insert. See where the circled rubber band is? The length of the insert from the flared top to that band is longer than the baffle is thick .. where the drivers frame is mounted.
Last edited:
Incorrect diameter would be a problem, I was simply ruling it out.
I think you are stretching it with that interpretation.
The exact action of any particular insert in any particular hole and material thickness is going to be hard to judge without having it in hand and testing it. The point of the image was to show that in thin material the insert is designed to form a washer behind and clamp the material, in a blind hole it expands outwards. In a through hole you might end up with a bit of both.
Trying to mount a driver with high vibration isolation and securely are two competing factors. Big excursion makes things harder, probably why you don't see it very often in commercial products.
CosmicDancer
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2022
- Messages
- 10
- Likes
- 33
After Alan fixed the problem that Nuyes told thing:
Look! Our product is good! Nuyes was lying! Apologize to me!
WOW WOW WOW ~
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #633
Thanks for the news.
All other issues aside, are these the same products?
1. The samples I measured had no sound absorbing material at the bottom of the woofer driver.
2. The sound absorbing material of the exact same material is not used for the inner wall. (See details.)
3. He says that all the wiring inside is fixed in the corner.
If so, he'll have to show how he fixed the tweeter's wiring.
At least, in the samples I received, that was not possible.
(I know the 'original' sound-absorbing structure, since I've disassembled this speaker.
First, lay out the two sound absorbing materials flat against the driver and passive radiator respectively.
Second, divide the remaining three sheets of sound absorbing material into thirds and fold them, and stack them one by one from the bottom to the top.
How did he secure the wiring inside the speaker to the corner of the box?)
4. The cable for the speaker wiring is also a different product.
Let's talk about the facts above.
Alan, why should we believe you sent a reply back to the speaker without 'no improvement'?
What is very clear from your mail is that you did not make the speaker 'same' as the one you sent to the Korean consumer.
It has been quite some time since this report was published.
How can we believe that Alan hasn't improved the product?
I don't want to be emotional about a particular person.
He pointed out the problems with the product itself and the attitude of the manufacturer to the consumer, but he didn't even make the slightest effort to review it.
He only attacked the reviewer's personality with expressions such as 'liar' and 'incompetent'.
He even attempted to estrange my relationship with the speaker owner by claiming that I had tampered with the product without permission.
And he posted an insult to me as a thread 'title' on the manufacturer's official website.
Let's think again.
If he had taken active action against the speaker owner from the beginning, the speaker owner would not have allowed the speaker to disintegrate.
Hiding behind his authority as a manufacturer and engineer, he ignored consumer opinions.
(He also used the 'Purifi'.)
Even if there was no problem, the preferred manufacturer does not blame the consumer first.
And it didn't take long for him to blame the reviewer.
That's why I wrote a review with this provocative title in ASR with the permission of the speaker owner.
From now on, I will fight this battle for my honor as a reviewer.
5. Now we all know about the 380hz issue of the Purifi driver.
But this is only the 3rd harmonic.
I don't think Alan is ignorant of the speaker's THD.
But why does he keep explaining this in THD only?
So, he thinks that the cause of the speaker's 400hz resonance (including 2nd to higher order harmonics) is due to the 3rd harmonic around 380hz of the Purifi driver?
Of course, no one may know the truth.
However, stating unconfirmed facts is not a good attitude as a manufacturer.
Especially when it is aimed at intellectually ignoring and blaming someone.
6. If the problem with the binding posts of the speakers I have measured is due to a 'mistake' by QC, he must disclose the condition of the original 'perfect' binding posts.
And this makes it impossible to ask the other owners of Sointuva WG to confirm.
Because, the moment you loosen the bolt to check the binding post, you ruin the 'secret sauce'.
And Alan continues to complicate the matter.
If there is a torque value recommended for the performance of the product, the manufacturer should disclose it.
Especially if he had a problem with the binding post and asked the customer to fix it himself.
(I'm surprised this actually happened. LOL)
7.Alan says his own QC is perfect.
I will accept it.
If so, he will be able to disclose the measurement data of the speakers used in this review.
And he just needs to prove 'there is no performance difference' through the measurement data of other speakers.
(I hope he didn't erase the data on these speakers because of the capacity of the hard drive.)
And....
Alan, do you want an apology and reconciliation?
Let the person who clearly did the wrong thing apologize first.
(Let's forget about 380hz things for now.)
You have personally insulted me and damaged my reputation by spreading 'unconfirmed facts' to your consumers in Korea.
Let's try to be as neutral as possible.
Can you provide objective 'evidence' that I first disassembled and destroyed this speaker before reviewing it and wrote a malicious review?
On the other hand, it is now known to anyone interested in this case that you have insulted me and tried to discredit me.
'Apologize', How beautiful is this? Who should first?
If you want people to believe your unsubstantiated claims about me...
You must also understand and embrace those who suspect you have improved your speakers.
And don't complain about it.
Just accept it.
Let's enjoy this situation together.
Of course, if you want.
Apologizing takes a lot of courage. Alan.
Last edited:
julbo
Member
Is the white cabinet using a different absorbent with cute little ridges or my eyes are cheated by some spell ?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #635
ANONYMOUS SOMEONE: This is a perfectly identical product. You can count on it. Except for the damn incompetent reviewer.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
Nuyes, he was attempting ironic humour. Don't take it seriously. Everyone here on ASR knows what you have uncovered and highlighted is significant and is representative of the products being delivered by the person concerned.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
But if you really want actual ball-tearing humour, go look at March Audio's "forum" where he constantly edits, updates, deletes and changes his own postings, time after time. It's so hilarious as to be pathetic.
Credibility goes totally out the window...again.
Credibility goes totally out the window...again.
Sokel
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 6,111
- Likes
- 6,177
For God's sake someone tell this person to hire a marketing manager and use the damping material for his own mouth.
Engineers are for engineering,it's dangerous and bad for bussiness to let them loose near normal people.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
Let’s take a step back, anyone would have mistakes and design flaws or other flaws in job just keep happens, even surgeries have repetitive cases where a tool is left inside the patient’s belly..
Thing is for a manufacturer who can make peace in customer’s mind, you have to try to see if it’s your own fault first, if yes just send out repair guides or recall for repair, or else investigate and make sure it’s others fault before disclosing or enrage on the web. For smaller companies I believe most customers are ok for him to recall the product and fix it for free and without refund. But if he just ignores it’s likely others just won’t but his product, at least on first batch before someone tear it down and confirm it’s really alright
Thing is for a manufacturer who can make peace in customer’s mind, you have to try to see if it’s your own fault first, if yes just send out repair guides or recall for repair, or else investigate and make sure it’s others fault before disclosing or enrage on the web. For smaller companies I believe most customers are ok for him to recall the product and fix it for free and without refund. But if he just ignores it’s likely others just won’t but his product, at least on first batch before someone tear it down and confirm it’s really alright
Similar threads
- Poll
