[woodsyi]

Well,

I feel partially (perhaps entirely) responsible for some of the development here.  I did not start the thread to disparage anyone's speakers.  I am, like so many here, am always fiddling with what I have to try new things to hopefully improve what I hear.  I am very aware that I have no expertise on speaker building but I am trying to understand how mine and others work.  Through it all I am not dissing anyones speakers.  Only thing I want to know is to understand what choices were made in the building process so that I can appreciate the strong points and adjust my gear including my room acoustics to minimize or cover the weak points.  Surely no speaker is perfect!

Cheers and happy listening!

[warnerwh]

DSK: I also got the "build a kit" response and also felt it was a blow off. Then you keep pushing and find out that these guys aren't kidding.

 I was going to use a 72" BG Ribbon as I'd heard two designs that had used them and thought they would be a good driver.  Also I knew of good speakers that used them. In both cases only the midrange sounded ok. Neither had a tweeter and the bass was AWFUL on both systems.  What's funny is these guys had the opinion that buying speakers was stupid and that they could do a fine job themselves and save money.  One of them was adamant on how stupid it is to not just buy the drivers and diy. I wonder why they both made apologies for their sound.

Both speakers were unlistenable they were so bad.  I don't know the total cost but the 72" BG ribbons alone are about 1500 bucks.  Those drivers definitely need a ribbon tweeter too imo and neither had one.  The BG drivers sound rolled off in the highs on their own. So figure they both definitely had over 2k into their speakers, not to mention time and labor, that sounded awful.  The main problem in both cases was the bass to ribbon transition.  The value of either of those speaker systems is no more than the bare drivers because nobody after hearing them would pay a penny more, maybe less.

After all that I decided I will buy RM 40's.  I'd heard them before deciding to try my world class speaker design.  They sound no less than outstanding top to bottom and look great too.  Those are the two most important aspects of speakers to me and the only sure way to get it is to buy them from someone who knows what they're doing.  At this point my curiosity of speaker engineering has been put to rest.

[ctviggen]

While I don't think any speaker is perfect, I do have to say that I agree with Brian in that I've never heard a speaker with metal drivers that did not become unlistenable after a while.  However, many people speak highly of the Salk systems, and I'd like to hear them myself and make my own decisions.  As for Eric's comments, even though some people have had both VMPS and Salk in the same room and chose Salk, that still doesn't mean that Salk are good for everyone.  When I heard zybar's system with the RM40s, I thought they were set up too aggressively and gratingly for my tastes, but zybar liked them that way (and ended up getting Salks).  My RM40s are set up totally differently than zybar's -- I can't stand aggressive speakers, so I've done everything I can to get rid of any hint of brightness and aggressiveness.   Marbles has Salks now, too and likes them better than RM40s.   But because they like them better does not mean that everyone will.  I've met many people who rave about B&Ws, yet I've never been able to listen to B&Ws -- in any system, regardless of components -- for any length of time.  They just grate on me.  Nonetheless, were anyone effusive about B&Ws, that's their perogative and while I wouldn't agree, I certainly wouldn't call them wrong.

There is no one correct speaker design.  I personally am excited to be able to hear the Salks and hope to hear them soon.  Metal drivers (assuming that the harmonics caused by such drivers can't be heard by a listener -- and I personally think that some people are more susceptible to this than others) certainly should add lightness and stiffness, which I think would be desirable in a driver.  On the other hand, the ability to tune the VMPS speakers I think is highly desirable and one of the main reasons I bought the speakers.  But then VMPS uses ribbons, which tend to be beamier and lack the "body" produced by cones.  Nonetheless, properly designed ribbons can be extremely fast and articulate, if one likes that sound.  Further, beamy can be good, as there's less interaction with the room (which is also a detriment - the sweetspot is smaller than cones).  And we could argue for days about crossover design.  (Though I tend more toward first order than higher order designs -- the speakers I like tend to have first order crossovers, like Thiel, Wilsons, etc.)

I think competition is good, and anyone would be happier with Salk, VMPS, or any of the speakers on this forum than with the generic, high end speakers sold elsewhere.  When you consider that my Linn 5140s, which I really like by the way -- my friend and I listened to many speakers before he chose those (and then I purchased them from him), cost more than either the Salk or the VMPS RM40s (not upgraded), and yet are blown away by the RM40s (and probably are blown away by the Salks), then we have every right to be happy.  

As for whether Brian is right, or Jim is right, or Rick is right, I personally do not have the knowledge (even with an MSEE) to judge.  I can only hope that they each do the best job they can and continue to improve their products so that I, as a consumer of such products, will benefit.

[Hogg]

While I don't think any speaker is perfect, I do have to say that I agree with Brian in that I've never heard a speaker with metal drivers that did not become unlistenable after a while

Try listening to Joseph Audio or the Salk Veracity standmounts or QW.  A different sound but certainly not grating.

                                                             Jim

[rosconey]

I think Rick is the least talented of the speaker designers that I have dealt with .  

Looking at his offering, I realized a long time ago that he has no "gut" at all.  His designs rarely stress any particular parts beyond their most linear range.  Most designers would try their best to use the least amount of parts to cover the entire audio range to keep cost down (this is where a lot of creativity comes in) but not Rick.  His phylosophy happens to coinside with my "chicken" view when purchase speake ...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
i have a pair of rick's speakers and they are the best ive ever had-
and he was a good guy to deal with-

[CornellAlum]

Personally, I would like to stop seeing the vmps vs. salk. vs whatever threads that have taken over since several members of the forum changed their speakers.  I am happy for those that have changed and been satisified, but, the bashing needs to stop and stop now.  You guys wonder why there are not more younger audiophiles in this world, and I, being "young" in this sense, can tell you this is a HUGE reason as to why.

[Marbles]

CornellAlum,

Since the ones doing the bashing have actually owned either the TOTL, or the second from the top speakers from VMPS, I think that gives them the right to bash....and I currently own the second from the top model.

A better question to ask is why they (we?) feel the need to bash...

I haven't seen where they (we?) bashed previous speakers owned, so why pick on VMPS?

If you get the answer to that question, then maybe you'll understand...or not.

[ekovalsky]

Well put Marbles.

[tkp]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
i have a pair of rick's speakers and they are the best ive ever had-
and he was a good guy to deal with-

Some one is actually picked up my sense of humor.

I built the Incredarray and the RC4 from Selah Audio.  They worth every penny and time I put into them.  To me all speakers are flawed in one way or another.  It just a matter of which flaws I can live with and which one I cannot.  

Come to think of it, there was a speaker that I used to own which I now feel that was way ahead of my time.  In another word, I think I might be worthy to own such a speakers in about 20 more years  .

[MaxCast]

Some one is actually picked up my sense of humor.

I built the Incredarray and the RC4 from Selah Audio.  They worth every penny and time I put into them.  To me all speakers are flawed in one way or another.  It just a matter of which flaws I can live with and which one I cannot.  

Come to think of it, there was a speaker that I used to own which I now feel that was way ahead of my time.  In another word, I think I might be worthy to own such a speakers in about 20 more years  .

I must say your first post had be puzzled.  I knew you had a couple of his speakers and like them very much.

[zybar]

CornellAlum,

Since the ones doing the bashing have actually owned either the TOTL, or the second from the top speakers from VMPS, I think that gives them the right to bash....and I currently own the second from the top model.

A better question to ask is why they (we?) feel the need to bash...

I haven't seen where they (we?) bashed previous speakers owned, so why pick on VMPS?

If you get the answer to that question, then maybe you'll understand...or not.

Bingo!!

George

[CornellAlum]

CornellAlum,

Since the ones doing the bashing have actually owned either the TOTL, or the second from the top speakers from VMPS, I think that gives them the right to bash....and I currently own the second from the top model.

A better question to ask is why they (we?) feel the need to bash...

I haven't seen where they (we?) bashed previous speakers owned, so why pick on VMPS?

If you get the answer to that question, then maybe you'll understand...or not.

Well, then can someone kindly explain to me the entire reason for the bashing in the first place because I clearly do not get it.

[kenk]

CornellAlum,

In order for anyone to explain, please point to us where anyone is bashing VPMS.   I did not see anything.  The first post was Rich trying to explain what happed to the HT3 (active vs passive X0) and then everyone got excited.

[jermmd]

CornellAlum,

In order for anyone to explain, please point to us where anyone is bashing VPMS.   I did not see anything.  The first post was Rich trying to explain what happed to the HT3 (active vs passive X0) and then everyone got excited.

I believe Rick was bashing VMPS in the first post of this thread. I may be wrong but I doubt it. Rick and Brian have a history of being very "competitive" with each other and have been unable to play nice in the past. It's unfortunate because otherwise great speakers get a lot of negative publicity as a result. Jim Salk has been a gentleman and should serve as an example to other designer/manufacturers.

[John Ashman]

I can see why Brian would be edgey based on

a) the title of the thread could easily be intrepreted as a slam
b) the fact that Rick, with their previous history, was one of those commenting

Nonetheless, the reaction was a bit over the top, but there were some mitigating factors there.  

Fortunately, ribbons and metal cones each do things differently and each do some things that are the same.  To say that metal cones are problematic and ribbons are not is kinda like Pam Anderson is a slut, but Paris Hilton is a virgin.  

[kenk]

Rick and Brian have a history of being very "competitive" with each other

Now this explains alot.  I did not know they went wayyyy back.  If this is the case, one can view the first post as a indirectly way of bashing VPMS.

[Rick Craig]

Rick and Brian have a history of being very "competitive" with each other

Now this explains alot.  I did not know they went wayyyy back.  If this is the case, one can view the first post as a indirectly way of bashing VPMS.

In no way was I intending to bash VMPS.

[Rick Craig]

I believe Rick was bashing VMPS in the first post of this thread. I may be wrong but I doubt it. Rick and Brian have a history of being very "competitive" with each other and have been unable to play nice in the past. It's unfortunate because otherwise great speakers get a lot of negative publicity as a result. Jim Salk has been a gentleman and should serve as an example to other designer/manufacturers.

There was no intention to bash VMPS but to help Brian's customer. I think a few people around here are more interested in protecting their egos than telling the truth.

[woodsyi]

You know I was exited to find some thing about woofer behavior and was hell bent on trying out on my pair because I was in position to change filter poles with my active crossover.  What Jim posted dovetailed with what I was reading and I was excited.  I tested my understanding on my speakers and  it worked for me in my room with my particular acoustics for my ears.  Rick, if he was trying to point out my misunderstanding, sure didn't spell out what it was.  I am still not sure of Rick's point.  I was in no way implying that either VMPS or Salk speakers were misdesigned. Without having heard HT3s, I wouldn't know, but people whose opinion I respect like them, bought them and are enjoying them.  Kudos for Jim.   I like the music my RM40s put out.  I will, however, continue to tinker with my gear to improve the sound for my ears.  I will continue to post about what I do with my system and what the results are.  I will continue to peruse other forums and learn from postings there.  But I will try to be a little more savvy about titles and wording so as not to invite this kind of development.  Now I am going to treat myself to a glass of Hennessy Paradis (I need it with the in-laws arriving for a week) and enjoy my speakers..............

[Brian Cheney]

Rick Craig and I get along fine.  Occasionally we get together to bash an unidentified third party we both detest.

I've never heard Rick's speakers.