0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 9051 times.
I heard some Fried towers at THE Show Newport Beach - same ones?I did not know Jim designed them - wasn't mentioned while I was there. Checked the online Absolute Sound and didn't see anything - is it only the print edition at this point?
Jim and company,Congrats on the very positive review of the Salk designed and manufactured Fried tower speakers in The Absolute Sound. Thank you also for the mention in the article, greatly appreciated.Martin
My September issue of TAS finally arrived today and I read Dick Olsher's review. Other than a small amount of nit-picking, he seemed to really like them, especially since he compared them to speakers costing twice as much and highly recommended them. A point I particularly liked was Dick not saying they were "just" tall vented designs, able to appreciate their real differences and attributes as mass-loaded TLs (I hope you're reading this, Martin). Last, thanks very much, Jim, for mentioning my name. I never thought back in the late-90s when I started tinkering with speaker building that there would come a time I would be noted as a contributor to a speaker design in a review by TAS. I hope you sell a jillion of them.Paul
Here's a link to the review: http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/bud-fried-tower-loudspeaker/?utm_campaign=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=email-181Glad to see the Fried tradition hasn't been forgotten, but having owned the Model B and M Fried speakers (and later Model Q5, still listening to Model A in my AV system) I do have some observations:1. It was the Model H's natural sound that 'woke me up' to "real" stereo (audio) as do all Fried speakers versus all the high-end hi-fi (artificial sounding) stuff out there. And nearly 40 years later I'm still 'spoiled' and instantly dismiss the vast majority of speakers. Frankly except for the Soundscape speakers, Salk's fall into the later category IMO. And frankly these look like a re-hash of the Song Towers, do they have an artificial hi-fi sound or a natural sound?2. I've never seen a MTM Fried, instead Bud vaunted the 'expanding sound source' (tweeter above midrange above woofer) to promote imaging and phase coherence. My Models B and M imaged like crazy (in all dimensions). 3. My Model M bass units (that I DIY'd) were MLTL. A later version of the Model B went from sealed to aperiodic design. Both the B and M used 'acoustic foam' sheets in an on-edge fashion. Models A and Q5 were his 'line tunnel' design with foam across the entire port (honestly never understood what 'line tunnel' was supposed to be, maybe someone can use MLK's MathCad application to model it). 4. 'Vintaging' is tricky. Some try a full restoration (original parts/design). Some try to make a sincere copy using modern materials. Some try to extrapolate what the original designer would offer today. But I'm afraid that this seems to fall into a 4th category, more of an attempt to use the Fried name to sell more Salk speakers (an easy trap to fall into when you believe in what you do), as I'm hard pressed to find the Fried in these speakers.
You're right Paul, I've not heard this speaker. (Actually I was criticizing the earlier Salk designs for having a typical artificial 'hi-fi' sound.) Bud would be the first to tell anyone that TL design in his day involved mountains of sawdust. Accordingly he was one of those 'can't leave it alone' guys (issuing updated cabinet tweaks and even driver replacements). But from the description it seems to be very much like another Salk speaker rather than a Fried. Living within an hour drive away from Jim I very much hope the Fried inspiration will result in natural/musical sounding speakers.I am glad Jim posted a couple of Bud's papers. Hopefully he'll find and post his newsletters as well. It's amazing how spot on many of his 'sacred concepts' still are (and yet designers are still trying to avoid following them).
It's always been hard to describe what we hear, but Bud always used live, un-amplified music as the only valid standard to audition by. As his articles point out, (unbelievably) many audio designers have never heard live, un-amplified music. If it sounds like a glorified PA system from the next room, its a waste of my time and I walk away. This applies to everything from the really cheap stuff to the mega-dollar gear. I'll admit to being biased enough to dismiss all large dipoles, line arrays, and MTM designs out of hand as flawed concepts (as per Bud). Granted some of the $$$$ pieces make really good artificial sound that deliver all kinds of audio goodies (high spls, big dynamics, detail, sparkling highs) that is entertaining for the short term and somewhat livable longterm. But if it sounds like a xylophone, saxophone, kettle drum, violin, or human voice (with the right tone, texture, body, and a realistic soundstage) without exaggerations I'm hooked. As an old Fried fanboy I admit to having preconceived notions. As Bud wrote, I'd take every time a well designed but modest speaker (that does right what little it does) versus a big, expensive, mistake ridden monster that is trying to conquer the world.In trying to follow Fried, have you Jim, Paul, or Dennis ever heard any of his speakers (I've read no such reference)? This thread is littered with what Irving could never have done (ditzing his work while using his name) without really mentioning (even on the website) what exactly is inspiring this latest resurrection of his name. There might just be more to the Fried sound than formulas or specifications can predict (true science never assumes, doesn't sit on laurels, but always questions). I have an old friend in Ann Arbor who may still have his Model C's in working order (stand mounted truncated pyramid, 2-way MLTL) that were one of his later, greatest (IMO) achievements. They would give a good taste, PM me for contact info if you're interested and I'll check with him.
