Interesting Speaker Development..........

[Mikado463]

Anyone else following this .............

 

[highfigh]

Anyone else following this .............

Not interested, especially if a customer says they want them. I'M not moving them and I assume he thinks they're great- I have watched his videos and he always has some kind of improvement for speakers that are known to sound great.

Two guys came into the stereo store where I worked, late-1978. Their speakers were made from some kind of stone. Looked nice, joints at the corners weren't great and they sounded strange, probably no insulation in the cabinets.

It's easy enough to make an inert speaker cabinet- why make it heavy, too?

 

[Mikado463]

LOL, a lot has changed since '78, just look in the mirror...............

 

[highfigh]

LOL, a lot has changed since '78, just look in the mirror...............

All I see is Same ol', same ol'. Really PO'd when I saw the bald spot caused by the last barber, though. But hey, it grows back, right?

 

[Mikado463]

All I see is Same ol', same ol'. Really PO'd when I saw the bald spot caused by the last barber, though. But hey, it grows back, right?

well it's like, what's the diff between a good haircut and a bad one ? about two weeks !

 

[TLS Guy]

well it's like, what's the diff between a good haircut and a bad one ? about two weeks !

Concrete speakers have been surfacing since the 1950s. They are a terrible idea, and not worth the time of day. Good old Gilbert Briggs debunked that in the 1950s!

Yes, they are rigid and don't vibrate, but they have one huge problem, concrete is a selective band pass filter. In other words some frequencies pass through the concrete easily and others don't. So it is not new and still a bad idea, in fact a very bad idea.

 

[Mikado463]

Concrete speakers have been surfacing since the 1950s. They are a terrible idea, and not worth the time of day. Good old Gilbert Briggs debunked that in the 1950s!

Yes, they are rigid and don't vibrate, but they have one huge problem, concrete is a selective band pass filter. In other words some frequencies pass through the concrete easily and others don't. So it is not new and still a bad idea, in fact a very bad idea.

a bad idea, so are you implying that unlike my post that you copied about a haircut 'correcting' itself in a couple of weeks these speakers are doomed forever ?

On a serious note I doubt very much that these speakers are of the same 'concrete composition' you speak of from the fifties, regardless, I'd love to hear a pair..........

 

[TLS Guy]

a bad idea, so are you implying that unlike my post that you copied about a haircut 'correcting' itself in a couple of weeks these speakers are doomed forever ?

On a serious note I doubt very much that these speakers are of the same 'concrete composition' you speak of from the fifties, regardless, I'd love to hear a pair..........

There have been a number of concrete designs over the years, and none have gained any traction. Concrete has changed little since its invention. Modern concrete was invented by Joseph Aspidin in 1824.

GAB did find though, that brick made a good enclosure, and had designs in his DIY books. I know quite a few people built that corner reflex design. You can not manufacture those, they have to be built in situ.

The real issue though is that both sealed and ported enclosures are inherently resonant, by virtue of the physics of the situation.

If you want truly low Q non resonant reproduction then your options are either an aperiodic transmission line, or an exponential horn with a low Q driver, like the Lowthers.

The fact is that truly natural, realistic bass is produced by well designed aperiodic TL speakers. I know as I have enjoyed them for years, and yes, the bass is much better than standard QB4 porting or sealed designs. In the UK there has been a return to manufacturing TL speakers again.

Sqishman has heard the studio TL system and the TL in wall sub system in the great room and he always comments on the quality of the bass.

Those are the ways to obtain natural bass and not concrete enclosures which will still be resonant designs, as I don't think you could make a concrete TL and there would be no point anyway.

 

[Cos]

As soon as I saw GR Research, I scrolled past to type this message...not interested

 

[lovinthehd]

LOL follow Danny? Why?

 

[mono-bloc]

Look like, Food for the gullible

 

[Kingnoob]

Concrete speakers imagine the weight if they were much bigger models . Need a moving crew to carry them… or Concrete box subs it seems sub makers want to purposely build massive weighed subs this could be a good idea.
I’ve seen someone build a big tv entertainment stand with Concrete bricks before online…

 

[MrBoat]

I saw this popping up on youtube, but as a DIY'r, this concept has been brought up repeatedly until it is forgotten, and then pops back up. This tells me GRR's well for content is running dry, as is everyone else's, due to the exponential information exposure traits that is the internet. The information gets used up faster than the technology can evolve.

Other than perhaps say, class D and other IC related development breakthroughs, audio quality (for music, anyway) hit a wall for me about 30 years ago, or right about when computers started making it nearly impossible to build audibly flawed products, even for the budget world. In other words, I could find affordable speakers that were either better than 'my' hearing capabilities, or satisfying enough to make me care less about their flaws.

Last hurdle for me for decades has, and will be, recording qualities. I can play the best recordings on some of the most humble equipment and have it come out audibly flawless enough to where if I try to hear what's wrong, it distracts me from the music, which is worse than said flaws.

 

[Teetertotter?]

This thread has a wealth of information and learned a lot.

 

[Mikado463]

I saw this popping up on youtube, but as a DIY'r, this concept has been brought up repeatedly until it is forgotten, and then pops back up. This tells me GRR's well for content is running dry, as is everyone else's, due to the exponential information exposure traits that is the internet. The information gets used up faster than the technology can evolve.

Other than perhaps say, class D and other IC related development breakthroughs, audio quality (for music, anyway) hit a wall for me about 30 years ago, or right about when computers started making it nearly impossible to build audibly flawed products, even for the budget world. In other words, I could find affordable speakers that were either better than 'my' hearing capabilities, or satisfying enough to make me care less about their flaws.

Last hurdle for me for decades has, and will be, recording qualities. I can play the best recordings on some of the most humble equipment and have it come out audibly flawless enough to where if I try to hear what's wrong, it distracts me from the music, which is worse than said flaws.

Translation...........'I'm getting old and no longer give a $hit' , just sit back and enjoy the music

 

[MrBoat]

Translation...........'I'm getting old and no longer give a $hit' , just sit back and enjoy the music

Well yeah, except I kinda figured it out before I got older, though. Concrete, granite, clay, round, trapezoidal, open baffle and a bunch of different wave guide shapes and everything else they have tried over the years. I just saw a lot more of it revisited via the diy route, and a tendency for many to throw every over-the-top woodworking trick at projects as well.

Just 'my' personal experience though. Not to say others can't find interest in such things but it seems super redundant to me, personally. The other topic that resurfaces repeatedly once content becomes thin for seemingly all 'content creators,' at some point is, the magic cable discussion. I know the perpetuator knows better, but will bring it up because it causes a lot of hits rather suddenly. Just seems kind of desperate, this far along in the game.

Perhaps it's just me, but new information on most audio forums across the net seems to be drying up as well. At one point, a few years ago, this site, for example, was pretty busy every day. Now when I stop by some evenings, there are one or two users online, when there used to be 30 or more somewhat regularly. Now I see topics at the top of the sub forums up for days, with the last response a week old. This tells me that most of the exciting things have been used up.

 

[TLS Guy]

Well yeah, except I kinda figured it out before I got older, though. Concrete, granite, clay, round, trapezoidal, open baffle and a bunch of different wave guide shapes and everything else they have tried over the years. I just saw a lot more of it revisited via the diy route, and a tendency for many to throw every over-the-top woodworking trick at projects as well.

Just 'my' personal experience though. Not to say others can't find interest in such things but it seems super redundant to me, personally. The other topic that resurfaces repeatedly once content becomes thin for seemingly all 'content creators,' at some point is, the magic cable discussion. I know the perpetuator knows better, but will bring it up because it causes a lot of hits rather suddenly. Just seems kind of desperate, this far along in the game.

Perhaps it's just me, but new information on most audio forums across the net seems to be drying up as well. At one point, a few years ago, this site, for example, was pretty busy every day. Now when I stop by some evenings, there are one or two users online, when there used to be 30 or more somewhat regularly. Now I see topics at the top of the sub forums up for days, with the last response a week old. This tells me that most of the exciting things have been used up.

I think it is a money issue. In addition I think there has been too much focus on multichannel systems, especially Atmos. Good two channel systems have been seriously neglected by us and the industry. Everybody is made to believe you need to plaster a room with speakers to have a good audio experience and you don't. The reality is that there should be far more two channel receiver and AVP options than those with eleven or more. Two good channels beats more lousy ones any day, and is far more socially acceptable. Actually what is required is active speakers systems connected directly to the TV. We have hit the buffers on hard dead end. That is why there is less interest.

 

[Kingnoob]

I think it is a money issue. In addition I think there has been too much focus on multichannel systems, especially Atmos. Good two channel systems have been seriously neglected by us and the industry. Everybody is made to believe you need to plaster a room with speakers to have a good audio experience and you don't. The reality is that there should be far more two channel receiver and AVP options than those with eleven or more. Two good channels beats more lousy ones any day, and is far more socially acceptable. Actually what is required is active speakers systems connected directly to the TV. We have hit the buffers on hard dead end. That is why there is less interest.

yes I was just testing out theater dimensional which is 3 speakers lcr and sub. It definitely sounds good.
I think the minimum acceptable amount of speakers today is 5.2.4 I see people suggest. When Atmos is impractical for many who can’t ceiling or wall mount speakers.