[pureiso]

Interesting thread. For instance I came across an old(?) post where Danny compared his N2X favorably with the Usher Be-718, with some advantages even. I can't help but think that the N2X drivers - as good as they may be and as tricked out as the crossover may be - are nowhere near as good as the 'world class' Usher woofer and tweeter. And yes I am going off the measurement work done by different folks at places like TechTalk, etc. but since Danny designed both I think it would real interesting to understand what facets make such seemingly incomparable designs comparable.

I ask partly because I just got the Usher 8948A and Usher 9950 to make a 2-way, and was surprised to come across Danny's comment re N2Xs! Maybe I made a mistake!

I am definitely pretty new to audio, but after listening to the N2xs in my room I honestly think I would believe Danny.
Also, if you are not completely sure Danny will let you 'borrow' his N2xs as I am doing right now.

[wushuliu]

I am definitely pretty new to audio, but after listening to the N2xs in my room I honestly think I would believe Danny.
Also, if you are not completely sure Danny will let you 'borrow' his N2xs as I am doing right now.

It's not about not believing anyone or doing any listening comparisons of my own (and I would need the Be-718s as well, would he let me borrow those too?! )

I just want to understand what makes the two designs approach proximity in performance. I think hearing about that, especially since they are designed by the same person, would make a very good example of what makes a top shelf, or at least high-end mini monitor. Is it purely the crossover? Crossover parts quality? Synergy of the drivers (for example, does the N2X require fewer parts and is designed to take advantage of that in a way the Be-718 can't?).

So instead of the generalities mentioned so far, this would be a specific example that also ties into the theme of the thread. Hopefully what I am asking makes sense.

[corndog71]

Danny posted an interview he did last year that is pretty enlightening.  It may not answer your question directly but explains some of his methods.

http://squarecad.net/ArchivePages/squarecad19_speakerdesign.html

[pureiso]

It's not about not believing anyone or doing any listening comparisons of my own (and I would need the Be-718s as well, would he let me borrow those too?! )

I just want to understand what makes the two designs approach proximity in performance. I think hearing about that, especially since they are designed by the same person, would make a very good example of what makes a top shelf, or at least high-end mini monitor. Is it purely the crossover? Crossover parts quality? Synergy of the drivers (for example, does the N2X require fewer parts and is designed to take advantage of that in a way the Be-718 can't?).

So instead of the generalities mentioned so far, this would be a specific example that also ties into the theme of the thread. Hopefully what I am asking makes sense.

Nope, what you are asking is pretty clear now.  Seeing that the price-only reaction at the N kits points to the Drivers being the most possible weak link due to the inexpensive nature of especially the woofers he uses.

I think that the issue is at this point we are not talking about power handling or frequency response which both seem to have handled pretty well.  Now this means that what we have left we have no real decent method to measure, ie distortion (like Danny stated in his post about drivers), soundstage, etc. that seam to be the dividing line for subjectivists and objectivists.  The art of design I guess at this point.

So now it comes to either decreasing returns or the fact that maybe he found a great synergy with inexpensive drivers.

[wushuliu]

...So now it comes to either decreasing returns or the fact that maybe he found a great synergy with inexpensive drivers.

Exactly. Hopefully Danny will expound on this.

[persisting1]

Not sure if you're aware, but the drivers used in N series speakers are designed by Danny.  He didn't have to find a synergy with an off the shelf products, he designed it that way.

Could he have used better materials and raised the price of the drivers?  Maybe he'll tell us.

[S Clark]

I've had many conversations w/ Danny over the years about drivers.  He works with the manufacturers to hit certain parameters at a price point.  Prototypes may go back and forth multiple times until a design does what he is looking for(several of his rejected prototypes have gone into my students designs).  As far as materials, Danny has always liked the way that coated paper behaves.  Using the M-130 as an example, there is very little new in the design,, but the lack of  breakup modes and smooth, extended frequency response makes it a DIY's dream.  I've seen them crossed as low and 1600Hz and as high as 3600Hz with good results.  He uses polymer frames not because they are cheaper, they don't have the resonance issues that cast frames have- most bigger companies are at least somewhat driven by marketing issues and equate "plastic" with cheap.
As far as the N B&G tweeter, I know that he was always tweaking looking an extra charateristic setting them apart from the standard factory version.  A Beryllium dome may have some characteristics that are better, but not at the price point for his designs.
--- but this really isn't about Danny's current line of products, it's about the ultimate top shelf mini monitor.  What features of a woofer/mid/tweeter would you design into a driver if price was no object?

Scott

[wushuliu]

I've had many conversations w/ Danny over the years about drivers.  He works with the manufacturers to hit certain parameters at a price point.  Prototypes may go back and forth multiple times until a design does what he is looking for(several of his rejected prototypes have gone into my students designs).  As far as materials, Danny has always liked the way that coated paper behaves.  Using the M-130 as an example, there is very little new in the design,, but the lack of  breakup modes and smooth, extended frequency response makes it a DIY's dream.  I've seen them crossed as low and 1600Hz and as high as 3600Hz with good results.  He uses polymer frames not because they are cheaper, they don't have the resonance issues that cast frames have- most bigger companies are at least somewhat driven by marketing issues and equate "plastic" with cheap.
As far as the N B&G tweeter, I know that he was always tweaking looking an extra charateristic setting them apart from the standard factory version.  A Beryllium dome may have some characteristics that are better, but not at the price point for his designs.
--- but this really isn't about Danny's current line of products, it's about the ultimate top shelf mini monitor.  What features of a woofer/mid/tweeter would you design into a driver if price was no object?

Scott

Hi Scott, thanks for the info. I am familiar with the backstory on the kits/drivers/materials. I am just using these two designs purely as a point of reference by which I may get an understanding of what makes a top shelf monitor great aside from making cabinet inert, binding posts, etc.

[S Clark]

Hi Scott, thanks for the info. I am familiar with the backstory on the kits/drivers/materials. I am just using these two designs purely as a point of reference by which I may get an understanding of what makes a top shelf monitor great aside from making cabinet inert, binding posts, etc.

I'm with you.  I'd like to hear more about all of these points when quality is the only concern. 

[cujobob]

I think it goes without saying, personally, one could always make a better driver. But for the same reason he doesn't just use Sonicap Platinums in all of his kits, he has to decide what will sell and offer the right value to customers. He orders drivers in bulk quantities and can't afford to invest a ton in drivers that won't move. Earl Geddes has often spoken of wanting to design his own cost-no-object driver with some unique ideas he has but faces the same issue. Just my two cents. The new drivers he designed seems to add some things I wanted as an improvement over the M130 drivers, but unfortunately require a cabinet larger than the M165x.

[LarryB]

I think it goes without saying, personally, one could always make a better driver

Generally speaking that is true.  However, just as is true for automobile engines, there are a few speaker drivers that represent the current state of the art.  Needless to say, they will not always hold that distinction, as designers wil continue to make improvements in materials, driver design etc. but for the here (hear?   ) and now, they are the best possible.

Larry

[cujobob]

I think there are always compromises made. The cost no object marketing mumbo jumbo is basically a lie IMHO. Could RAAL and Accuton build a better driver if money is no issue? I believe they could. At those price points would there be a market? Not much of one. I'm just happy that inexpensive speakers are starting to get better quality drivers in them.

[LarryB]

cujobob:

Indeed, even the "cost no object" designs may have some restraints, though I suspect in at least some cases, they truly are the best the designer knows how to build.

I'm just happy that inexpensive speakers are starting to get better quality drivers in them.

Indeed, as technology improves, it trickles to all levels.  (An excellent example is the Andrew Jones-designed budget Pioneer speaker, the model number of which I cannot recall right now.)  As I often tell peole, an average modern sedan handles beter than the sports cars of twently or thirty years ago, the result of tremendous improvements in materials and our understanding of suspension geometries, etc.

Larry

[Russell Dawkins]

Indeed, as technology improves, it trickles to all levels.  (An excellent example is the Andrew Jones-designed budget Pioneer speaker, the model number of which I cannot recall right now.)
Larry

It's the Pioneer SP BS-41. I bought a pair at Canadian retail ($199, from Pioneer - free shipping) and am impressed with the frequency linearity and low distortion, but most of all with how well they do bass. Orchestras sound good, even without a subwoofer, plus they make a matching sub for similar silly money.
http://www.amazon.com/Pioneer-SP-BS41-LR-Watt-2-Way-Speaker/dp/B0045US6DE

[cujobob]

I think market pressure from I.D. companies is the major reason, but the trickle down effect is always good. I've read about those Pioneer speakers, Woot has had them on sale for 99$ a few times. The crossover design is good so the speaker should sound nice, but that doesn't have anything to do with the drivers. For example, Danny's X-LS monitor was engineered well and the woofer is decent, but the tweeter is pretty cheap. For $200 at that time, was hard to nitpick, of course. Maybe next time Woot has them available I'll snap up a pair.

[wushuliu]

The Pioneer stuff brings up something else I've learned while researching some of Danny's posts here and other forums on improving speaker performance to 'next level': crossover design and parts quality. See, I got into audiophilia only a few years ago via building diy speakers. So I never went through a retail speaker buying phase. All this time I have just kind of assumed that all but the most budget-priced used higher quality parts and crossover design. Researching over the past few days I am starting to understand Danny's constant emphasis on crossover parts - which I did not understand for the longest time, like what's the big deal, all my builds use air core, mills resistors, erse, etc. as do most other diy guys. And I am not even referring to boutique, just standard higher quality parts.

But now I am reading how even $2k speakers cut costs by using arguably lower quality parts (or at least lower quality relative to the cost of the speaker) - and this is assuming an otherwise competent design. I had no idea. So now I am getting a better sense of why an N2X for instance can approach cost no object - because even the pricey retail stuff do not necessarily go to such lengths internally (vs. external like cabinet parts/hardware), whereas I just assumed they did.

The Internet direct guys do seem to have improved things on that front. What sets the Pioneers apart it seems is the fact that the crossover used exceeds expectations given the price point. Which in my mind should just be a given because a competent crossover should not cost that much, especially if lower quality parts are used. I guess I have been very naive regarding retail speaker quality. I bet those Pioneers have pretty cheap innards that could take performance higher with some basic inexpensive upgrades (now I sound like Danny!).

[jackman]

I picked up those Pioneer speakers from Woot for $99 delivered.  They are surprisingly good sounding and nicely made.  The cabinet walls are in the thin side and I can't figure out how to get the drivers off to install hirez or bh5. As is, they play to high spl's and have great bass for 5.25" woofers.  I don't know how the drivers compare to Danny's (I suspect Danny's are higher quality) but these little woofers are capable of very impressive excursion without bottoming out.  At high levels they get compressed like any smaller speakers but these things sound better than anything I've ever heard in this price range.  I might buy another pair if they ever show up on woot again or if I see a pair cheap on eBay.

The only negative is the fixed metal cages over the drivers because you can't take them off.  Great if you have small kids but not good if you are a curious audio geek.  I was thinking about upgrading the caps with some extra audiocap theta caps I have laying around (if I can find the correct value) but for a second system or garage setup, they do a great job especially with Rock music.   


Cheers

Jack

[Danny Richie]

Exactly. Hopefully Danny will expound on this.

I will get back to this and answer these questions as soon as I get a chance.

[LarryB]

Wushuliu:

So now I am getting a better sense of why an N2X for instance can approach cost no object - because even the pricey retail stuff do not necessarily go to such lengths internally

It is certainly true that most designers have to design to a price point, but I do not agree that all that is required to achieve world class performance is simply adding $50 or $100 to the x-over budget.  As the saying goes, you cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear; the best x-over in the world will not compensate for serious driver deficiencies. 

If you ever have the opportunity, listen to a properly implemented Cogent DS-1428 field coil midrange driver; or the wide bander in the Voxative Ampeggio; or the TAD beryllium coax.  These drivers are mind-blowingly good, and there is no way a medicore driver can be brought to this level, even with a x-over made of unobtanium.

Larry 

[wushuliu]

Wushuliu:

It is certainly true that most designers have to design to a price point, but I do not agree that all that is required to achieve world class performance is simply adding $50 or $100 to the x-over budget.  As the saying goes, you cannot make a silk purse from a sow's ear; the best x-over in the world will not compensate for serious driver deficiencies. 

If you ever have the opportunity, listen to a properly implemented Cogent DS-1428 field coil midrange driver; or the wide bander in the Voxative Ampeggio; or the TAD beryllium coax.  These drivers are mind-blowingly good, and there is no way a medicore driver can be brought to this level, even with a x-over made of unobtanium.

Larry

Hi Larry, that's not what I was saying, hence 'assuming an otherwise competent design'. And my previous posts above have already touched on the question of driver quality, etc.

And please understand I am speaking in generalities.