DIY Loudspeakers: Can You Build "Better" Than Professional Designs?

[Nuance AH]

Not everyone thinks ID/DIY is the best.

True dat. Again, though, ID is not the same as DIY. I'm not sure how it is that you don't comprehend that.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Always safer to be neutral & politically correct.

I have 9 B&M "Pro" & 3 ID speakers (Linkwitz, Philharmonic, Funk) in my house.

Both BM & ID/DIY can be great and can be great value.

Both BM & ID/DIY can cost more than some of us are willing to pay.

Saying that ID/DIY always gives us more bang-for-the-buck isn't true.

I paid $14K for a brand new Salon2 from an authorized Revel dealer. Many people have payed $15-18K for brand new delivered piano gloss Salon2.

If I wanted a Salk SS12 with piano gloss mahogany, it would cost me $19K.

Same could be said of some other ID companies and BM companies. It's a 2 way street. There are 2 sides to every story.

This article is definitely not "balanced" or PC. It's only one take. Only one side to a story. One opinion. The author's goal isn't to make everyone happy or love him or be balanced. If it were, this thread would probably be dead & quiet already. We would all agreed and moved on and never looked back from the very first day the thread was posted. Boring and agreeable.

No, this article was meant to stir the pot and cause 2-sided debate and discussion.

Why do you say "ID/DIY". Shouldn't it be B&M/ID?

Anyway, I don't think anyone in this thread has claimed that "ID/DIY always gives us more bang-for-the-buck". The common point being made is that competent DIYers can produce fantastic speakers these days, as there are plenty of creditable design resources to draw on and loads of great drivers available for DIY.

No matter what the purpose of the article was, whether to voice an opinion or to "stir the pot", it is an epic FAIL in my opinion. Why is that? Because he comes across as a shill for speaker manufacturers and therefore, has no credibility when comparing DIY with B&M/ID. If he wanted to generate a debate, where is he? If he can come back with solid evidence that DIY designs are generally bad, with a few "happy accidents" sprinkled around, I'll certainly be willing to pay attention and give him his due.

 

[Nuance AH]

Why do you say "ID/DIY". Shouldn't it be B&M/ID?

This. He's very confused if he considers them the same.

I think this article ruffled a lot of feathers!
His method is far worse than his message.
Even though I generally disagree with his premise, I could produce a far more mature argument in support of B&M speakers.
His depiction of DIY'ers as "willy-nilly" trial and error without scientific/engineering approach or research is one we all know to be false.
I am sure some such hack DIY'ers do exist, but they should not be the foundation for argument against DIY ability.

Perhaps his definition of DIYers differs than ours? Does he mean someone inexperienced or new/novice? Is he talking about designing something completely from the ground up without using preexisting specs or the assistance of others? It sure would be nice if he chimed in to clarify, but I think we scared him off.

 

[Chu Gai]

Perhaps his definition of DIYers differs than ours? Does he mean someone inexperienced or new/novice? Is he talking about designing something completely from the ground up without using preexisting specs or the assistance of others? It sure would be nice if he chimed in to clarify, but I think we scared him off.

I think he's looking at it as some sort of a bell curve distribution of DIY'ers and the really good ones represent some small area to the left. Take a look at PartsExpress and when you look at some of the drivers, read the comments from folks who've bought them and draw your own opinions on whether they really know what they're doing.

 

[monkish54]

Why do you say "ID/DIY". Shouldn't it be B&M/ID?

I say ID/DIY, and I think ADTG does it for the same reason I do. When talking about DIY speakers being better than speakers by a big company, there is always that one guy who claims DIY lacks the resources. This is obviously false, and some ID companies are a testament to this. Look at Salk Sound; they have the same resources I do (off-the-shelf drivers, CNC, gated/outdoor measurements), yet they make some great speakers! Saying DIY/ID is really a compliment to ID companies like Salk, not an insult.

When talking about ID in a general sense, it is definitely "go look at the ID/B&M offerings", but as far as the resources argument goes, DIY/ID, most of the time, can be paired together.

 

[TjMV3]

I can't help but chuckle and giggle at the some of the silliness, in this thread.

There's a tremendous irony, a comical irony running through.

For the last 12 years, in several forums (not just this one), I've been reading absurdly rude and arrogant comments being made by not just some DIYers, but often by arrogant "Audiophiles" where they thoroughly, viciously and arrogantly hammer mainstream loudspeaker designers/engineers and deneigrate them to no end. With zero concern or regard in the words they choose. With zero self-awareness, zero modesty and zero humility.

Arrogant so-called "Audiophiles" who typically know next to nothing about loudspeaker science and design. But that never stopped them from trashing every brand, model and designer they could sink their hungry little teeth into.

So, Mr. Steve Feinstein basically calls all of the above out and lays out a nice helping of their own medicine.

The farce of phoney outrage and feigned insult is as comical, as it can ever get.

Suddenly, the types that so often participated in that awful behavior: feign self-righeousness and feign phoney higher ground character. And then respond with the same vicious arrogance towards Mr. Fienstein. Self-awareness? Haha, yeah right! Integrity? Where? You can't make this stuff up.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of good guys/gals in this hobby (passion for music), from top to bottom. Plenty of good people. Unfortunately, it is the arrogant "Audiophiles" (who are often dealers) and arrogant " DIYers" with verbal diarrhea, who have cannabalized this business...this Hobby. You cannabalize yourselves.

 

[monkish54]

I've been reading absurdly rude and arrogant comments being made by not just some DIYers, but often by arrogant "Audiophiles" where they thoroughly, viciously and arrogantly hammer mainstream loudspeaker designers/engineers and deneigrate them to no end.

Arrogant so-called "Audiophiles" who typically know next to nothing about loudspeaker science and design.

Look at my thread creation history until you find a thread that has the word "audiophile" in it. There you will find how much I like audiophiles...

So, Mr. Steve Feinstein basically calls all of the above out and lays out a nice helping of their own medicine.

He clumps together every DIYer and claims they are ignorant know-nothings who, only by sheer luck, might design something that works...

Suddenly, the types that so often participated in that awful behavior

I highly disagree, and honestly resent that, sir. Many of the people who have posted in this thread are stand-up guys who have my utmost respect. I have yet to see one of these guys display the attitude or lack of knowledge that Mr. Feinstein and yourself accuse them of. Sure, some here are more knowledgeable than others, but I haven't witnessed the less knowledgeable running around claiming they can build the best of the best or that all B&M companies are evil!

I sure haven't seen any "holier than thou" attitudes here..you are mistaken, sir!

 

[Nuance AH]

I say ID/DIY, and I think ADTG does it for the same reason I do. When talking about DIY speakers being better than speakers by a big company, there is always that one guy who claims DIY lacks the resources. This is obviously false, and some ID companies are a testament to this. Look at Salk Sound; they have the same resources I do (off-the-shelf drivers, CNC, gated/outdoor measurements), yet they make some great speakers! Saying DIY/ID is really a compliment to ID companies like Salk, not an insult.

When talking about ID in a general sense, it is definitely "go look at the ID/B&M offerings", but as far as the resources argument goes, DIY/ID, most of the time, can be paired together.

ID companies don't lack resources, though; they have the same availability of resources as B&M. The main difference is the business model, in which ID cuts out the middle man. Other than that they are more similar than not, while DIY is completely separate and different than both. Lumping ID and DIY together is simply incorrect.

 

[monkish54]

ID companies don't lack resources, though; they have the same availability of resources as B&M. The main difference is the business model, in which ID cuts out the middle man. Other than that they are more similar than not, while DIY is completely separate and different than both. Lumping ID and DIY together is simply incorrect.

Anechoic chambers, ground-up driver design, huge manufacturing factories (which ID doesn't need), A/B switching platforms, MILLIONS on R&D (Revel comes to mind)...ID doesn't have the same resources as large B&M...not even close!

IMO, like DIY, they don't need to! Off-the-shelf drivers are more than adequate. Anechoic chamber? How about outside? A/B switching platform? Cool, but not necessary to build a good loudspeaker. R&D? Thanks to many DIYers, ID, AND B&M alike, we have much research. Salk doesn't need to re-research something a bigger company already found!

ID and DIY ABSOLUTELY lack some of the resources that large companies have. The question is: Are these resources necessary to create an excellent speaker system? The answer, as many have proved, is no!

 

[gene]

ID companies don't lack resources, though; they have the same availability of resources as B&M. The main difference is the business model, in which ID cuts out the middle man. Other than that they are more similar than not, while DIY is completely separate and different than both. Lumping ID and DIY together is simply incorrect.

The savings passed on to consumers by ID companies cutting out the middle man is often a myth. It's something quite evident when looking at the quality of parts and craftsmanship inside the box. Many B&M companies now sell direct too so this really levels the playing field.

 

[monkish54]

The savings passed on to consumers by ID companies cutting out the middle man is often a myth. It's something quite evident when looking at the quality of parts and craftsmanship inside the box. Many B&M companies now sell direct too so this really levels the playing field.

We're really talking about Salk, Philharmonic, Ascend. I don't think those companies lack solid parts and construction.

KEF sells direct at dealer prices. They make more of the profit, and sell more speakers distributing themselves, but pass none of the savings onto me. They also use very few crossover parts..

I like KEF, but let's not pretend (no offense) they would be selling the SoundScape 12 for 16K or the Philharmonic 3 for 3.5K...

 

[gene]

We're really talking about Salk, Philharmonic, Ascend. I don't think those companies lack solid parts and construction.

KEF sells direct at dealer prices. They make more of the profit, and sell more speakers distributing themselves, but pass none of the savings onto me. They also use very few crossover parts..

I like KEF, but let's not pretend (no offense) they would be selling the SoundScape 12 for 16K or the Philharmonic 3 for 3.5K...

Agreed, these are some great examples of companies that have slim margins in their products due to quality of parts and craftsmanship. Ascends is one that really stands out IMO b/c their stuff is very affordable despite the level of parts and performance offered.

 

[monkish54]

Ascends is one that really stands out IMO b/c their stuff is very affordable despite the level of parts and performance offered.

I too, really like Ascend. The Sierra Ribbon Tower measures very well and it's not very expensive as far as high end speakers go!

I'm not so sure Dennis Murphy understands what a profit margin is! At one point, paypal (~3%) had a larger profit margin than he did!

 

[gene]

A Note To Consider

One food for thought I'd like to inject:

I've noticed throughout the years that some of the esoteric designs I've tested had to be sent back NOT because they didn't sound or look fabulous but because they simply were incapable of playing loudly without either bottoming out or having impedance issues shutting amplifiers off with sensitive short circuit protection. I've found some of the larger companies are much better at power testing their products and also ensuring their crossovers are properly designed to work with a wider variety of amplifiers.

You would be surprised the % of speakers that come into my lab for testing that never make it to the review phase for this very reason. Some of the speakers are from brands that folks really respect and admire in this very thread. Nobody is perfect whether its DIY, ID, B&M, etc. Thankfully there are so many great brands to chose from and some well established, time tested DIY designs for folks to try out for themselves.

 

[JerryLove]

I can't help but chuckle and giggle at the some of the silliness, in this thread.

Let's see if you can be specific or if the condensation is rhetorical.

There's a tremendous irony, a comical irony running through.

For the last 12 years, in several forums (not just this one), I've been reading absurdly rude and arrogant comments being made by not just some DIYers, but often by arrogant "Audiophiles" where they thoroughly, viciously and arrogantly hammer mainstream loudspeaker designers/engineers and deneigrate them to no end. With zero concern or regard in the words they choose. With zero self-awareness, zero modesty and zero humility.

I think I see where you are going with this... beyond just flaming ("rude", "arrogant" (x2), "arrogantly", "viciously", [lack of] "concern", [lack of] "humility").

So through-out this thread are people who have bashed mainstream speakers, in general (as opposed to specific ones) who are now upset that they are being similarly bashed.

For one thing: That's hypocrisy, not irony. Please go look up the word in a dictionary.

But (and this may qualify as cosmic irony), can you show that they are the same people posting here? Hardly worthy to blame one group for the sins of some nebulous other group neh?

Arrogant so-called "Audiophiles" who typically know next to nothing about loudspeaker science and design. But that never stopped them from trashing every brand, model and designer they could sink their hungry little teeth into.

So, Mr. Steve Feinstein basically calls all of the above out and lays out a nice helping of their own medicine.

So you believe that Feinstein was making a tautological argument: "people who know nothing know nothing", and was not, in fact, talking about all (or most) all people who have ever built their own speakers?

I don't get that form his article. Can you highlight some sections that you feel best illuminate this intent?

The farce of phoney outrage and feigned insult is as comical, as it can ever get.

Suddenly, the types that so often participated in that awful behavior: feign self-righeousness and feign phoney higher ground character. And then respond with the same vicious arrogance towards Mr. Fienstein. Self-awareness? Haha, yeah right! Integrity? Where? You can't make this stuff up.

Could you name some names? Who on this thread is of "the type" that participated in this awful behavior?

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of good guys/gals in this hobby (passion for music), from top to bottom. Plenty of good people. Unfortunately, it is the arrogant "Audiophiles" (who are often dealers) and arrogant " DIYers" with verbal diarrhea, who have cannabalized this business...this Hobby. You cannabalize yourselves.

So that I'm clear: do you mean all people who build any of their own gear (DIYers) are cannibalizing this hobby? Or do you mean "the undefined subset of people who are cannibalizing this hobby are cannibalizing this hobby"?

Because the former is something you cannot support, and the latter is not worth saying.

Hey. I found silliness after-all.

 

[Nuance AH]

Anechoic chambers, ground-up driver design, huge manufacturing factories (which ID doesn't need), A/B switching platforms, MILLIONS on R&D (Revel comes to mind)...ID doesn't have the same resources as large B&M...not even close!

IMO, like DIY, they don't need to! Off-the-shelf drivers are more than adequate. Anechoic chamber? How about outside? A/B switching platform? Cool, but not necessary to build a good loudspeaker. R&D? Thanks to many DIYers, ID, AND B&M alike, we have much research. Salk doesn't need to re-research something a bigger company already found!

ID and DIY ABSOLUTELY lack some of the resources that large companies have. The question is: Are these resources necessary to create an excellent speaker system? The answer, as many have proved, is no!

Some of that stuff isn't necessary, nor is it available to most B&M companies. The huge companies like Harman will always have the best toys and potential capabilities, but those giant companies make up a small portion of the B&M manufacturers. The non-giant ones have no more advantage than companies like Salk and Ascend, which both have instant switching/comparison capabilities and R&D budgets. Salk uses custom made drivers by a Green Bay, Wisconsin company for their HT3 for example. I still maintain my position that many of the more popular and larger ID companies have access to the same resources as B&M, and some perhaps more than the typical B&M. They also offer more customization. Nobody will ever beat companies like Harman in the available resources and funds department, though, but that doesn't mean their products are automatically inferior.

Gene, I was speaking of the ID business model in comparison to B&M and wasn't trying to claim ID always offers a superior product.

 

[monkish54]

Some of that stuff isn't necessary, nor is it available to most B&M companies.

I don't disagree. Lot's of companies have great amount of money, though. Boston, McIntosh (did), Denon, Marantz, Revel, JBL, Crown (all the Harman companies), KEF, B&W, TAD, Pioneer, etc.

Salk uses custom made drivers by a Green Bay, Wisconsin company for their HT3 for example.

Acoustic Elegance would be that company, no? IMO, they make some of the best drivers around. Salk also uses AE woofers in their flagship, if I am not mistaken.

They also offer more customization.

Just like DIY.

This is why I say ID/DIY. If most of that stuff "isn't necessary, nor is it available to most B&M companies" than why does the "resources" argument only apply to ID? I say DIY/ID because they can both create amazing speakers even though they aren't large (see above list) companies. When does DIY split from ID? What does ID have that DIY needs in order to build a good loudspeaker?

 

[JerryLove]

A company which will sell more of a given model can afford to bring more resources to the design of that model. A large company like HarmonKardon can afford to put an entire team of engineers into designing base-model speakers.

Per dollar spent to manufacture (including labor), I would expect that a large company will usually out-perform a small one. They have the ability to source cheaper, they can devote more resources to cost optimizations, and there's an economy of scale.

When it comes to dollar-per-performance for the buyers; those advantages must overcome some disadvantages. One is the distribution methods. Best Buy wants its cut; and that's usually a doubling of price over what the manufacturer is already making a profit on.

Further: how strong that advantage is depends on the market of the individual speaker (or brand). When Jim Salk buys a Raal driver from madisound: Raal made a profit, then Madisound made a profit, then Jim (hopefully) made a profit. When B&W manufacturers their own driver: there's only one hand looking to make money. But B&W is large. A smaller B&M company (are there any left that have not been gobbled up) still has to buy from a third party. I know McIntosh in the Russell era was buying at least its tweeters. They likely bought from the factory (skipping the proverbial Madisound from our story); but would still be at a disadvantage relative to someone whose volume made in-house (or on-contract) building possible.

Further: B&M is limited by its need to appeal to a larger market. Again, some botique brands may more resemble IDs than B&M here, and that distinction can get fuzzy indeed.

As TLS pointed out: the home builder has some signifigant advantages in the areas of free labor (himself), customization to room, and no need to worry about transport or distribution.

It's a complex recipe; and neither side comes out on top in all cases.

 

[Nuance AH]

Just like DIY.
When does DIY split from ID? What does ID have that DIY needs in order to build a good loudspeaker?

One is a company for profit while the other isn't a company nor for profit. One has the need to meet deadlines, offer warranties, meet customer demands, offer multiple lines, meet a quantity and quality quota in a specific amount of time. One deserves more scrutiny because they are a real business and therefore needs to provide more proof that their designs are good. I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. While most of these ID and B&M companies have guys that are DIYers at heart involved, they are totally separate than DIY.

I never said DIY can't build as good a speaker by the way. I think your assuming that's what I meant. My point is ID is on par with B&M as they're both actual companies with deadlines and production lines, while DIY is none of those. They are not the same thing. They all are vessels to the potential for great sound, however.

 

[agarwalro]

Counterpoint:

When big companies combine clear vision (favoring the customer) with talented designers, exceptionally good sounding speakers can be made for low cost. For example, Andrew Jones Signature Series and Infinity Primus Series. When big companies loose their vision, great talent and enormous resources are squandered in pursuit of profit margins. For example, Bose.