[NoDiggity]

All,
  I own JM-Lab speakers, but being a newbie with little knowledge of history, I am always intrigued by the look of two other speaker brand - Sonus Faber and Usher. I thought they look pretty similar. The dealer who sold me the JM-Lab speakers didn't have anything good to say about Usher, he just shrugged it off like a P.O.S, saying that Usher copied design from JM-Lab and Sonus Faber. But I am not taking his words too seriously, at the end of the day he's a business man..

  But serious, can anyone here share with me what you guys knows about these three brands of speakers? Feel free to trash JM-Lab, even though I own it, I won't be offended, music is like wine tasting, I've learned to listen to people's opinion, have a laugh, and take nothing too personal.

  Thanks
  Dylon

[PhilNYC]

I find it odd that someone who is a fan of JM-Labs speakers would trash another company because they "copied the design from JM-Labs"...wouldn't this imply that JM-Labs was a bad speaker? 

In any case, all three companies make high quality products IMHO...it's all a matter of personal taste and system synergy as to which you might prefer and be of high value to you.  In my limited experiences with all three of these brands, Usher has been my favorite...

[marvda1]

this gets to me , mostly because i am an usher owner but correct me if i'm wrong... all of the following speakers look alike and i have never in any thread read where someone complained that the manufacturer copied off of another design.
genesis 5.2
hyperion 938
verity parsifal ovation
von schweikert vr-4jr and 4sr
wilson watt/puppy 7
selah audio 3d
so why pick on usher??  do they sound alike??  which is the better value for the money?
if the design  of certain speakers is so unique then why don't they patent the design and if someone copies it sue them.

[95bcwh]

They may look similar, but from my very limited experience (comparing their mid-line speakers below $10,000 mark) they sound quite different. I know of a dealer here in Houston, he's always very critical of Usher, but knowing him personally, he's kind of a dick, everything else is bad except what he's selling in his store.

[JLM]

How many ways can you "invent" a speaker when you start with similar goals and use comparable designs?

Modern taste calls for tight bass down to around 50 Hz, high levels of detail, and wide dispersion.  The vast majority of speakers currently sold fall into the two same camps: two way standmounts about 13 inches tall with tweeter over woofer (perhaps the tweeter is offset); and roughly 40 inch tall, narrow baffle ported floorstanders with the drivers in a vertical row (sometimes in a MTM design, and if the woofer doesn't fit the baffle its side mounted).  Tweeters are nearly always soft domes and for a given price range, there is a limited selection of good mid/woofers available.  Two recipes with similar ingredients should yield two sets of about the same old tired results.

Didn't Einstein define insanity as doing the same thing in the same way and expecting different results?

What intrigues me are unique designs.  Single driver stuff takes the cake here as they push to develop enough bass; but other speakers like tweaky open baffles, VMPS extended range ribbon driver and CD lens, active designs, and TBI subwoofers are also interesting.

[nonoise]

From what I remember, Usher has their drivers built to their specs and are not off the shelf items, though they resemble certain makes and are, in fact, made by the same manufacturers shared by many others. I  haven't heard them, personally, but from what I've gleaned, they are very good speakers that cost less than the competition, and that gives them the shakes.

Tim

[Rob Babcock]

I agree that form follows function.  It's hardly surprising that so many speakers generally look alike.  There's a relatively short list of driver types, and all must follow the same laws of physics.  So even without deliberately copping styling cues, etc it's not unusual that we see a lot of similarities.

[Daygloworange]

How many times do you see one car and mistake it for another make? And did you ever notice, they all seem to have similarly shaped rubber things at all four corners that they use to reduce friction?

Sometimes the copy is better than the original.

Cheers

[JLM]

Daygloworange,

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.  Yes after decades of following the same basic designs they're bound to get better, however market forces can move things "off-center".

BTW rubber is used on tires to provide better traction, not reduce friction.  Reducing friction would be very bad.  (Ever drive on ice?)  And not being able to tell one car from another is old age creeping up on you (take it from experience my friend).


Rob,

Yet those examples I listed and many others have shown creativity and I applaud the designers.

[Bill Baker]

The similarities stop at the aesthetics. The drivers are made by Usher themselves. Years ago, the owner of Usher approached Scan Speak to order a very large number of drivers to use in their new forthcoming line. The order was so large, 10,000 pieces, that the Scan Speak rep thought he was pulling his leg and told him to come back when he was serious. Very bad mistake on part of the Scan Speak rep.
 The owner of Usher decided to source the cone from the very same place as Scan Speak does as it has been around for countless years. Usher then designed their own motor structure, yada, yada, yada....... the rest is history.
 There are so many speaker manufacturers these days that appearances are bound to start overlapping. You simply cannot judge a book by it's cover. Many dealers will dis Usher simply because it is so affordable. The bottom line is that they are exceptional speakers providing even better value. Are they the best???? We all know the answer to that one. Another contenter on the list of speakers to audition.
 Listen for yourself and become your own judge.

[Daygloworange]

BTW rubber is used on tires to provide better traction, not reduce friction.  Reducing friction would be very bad.  (Ever drive on ice?)

I grew up racing snowmobiles and ice racing motorcycles. Ever try and push a snowmobile on ice?

  

 And not being able to tell one car from another is old age creeping up on you (take it from experience my friend

I said did you ever mistake one car from another. I didn't say it like I couldn't tell one from another if they were parked beside each other. Methinks you're splitting hairs here.

Cheers

[95bcwh]

Many dealers will dis Usher simply because it is so affordable.

Bill, I have heard many people saying that Usher is affordable and better value, I'm intrigued, can you give an example? e.g. is the sound quality of a $5000 Usher speakers on par with a $10,000 JM-Lab speaker?

Thanks
barry

[Daygloworange]

Bill, I have heard many people saying that Usher is affordable and better value, I'm intrigued, can you give an example? e.g. is the sound quality of a $5000 Usher speakers on par with a $10,000 JM-Lab speaker?

Don't make the mistake of equating price with quality. Or size with quality. There are plenty of comments and reports on Audiocircle of the recent RMAF show. There are a lot of good reports of smaller scale manufacturers outperforming the big boys. Do a little digging.

Personally, I'm comfortable that I will be able to build a killer system, exactly to my liking from just the manufacturers here on Audiocircle. And actually I'd rather do that than have a system full of "name" brand components.

I like rooting for the underdog. ( or little guy, whichever you prefer )

Cheers

[95bcwh]

You know, the RMAF is really not a good place to evaluate hi-end audio, all the systems are inevitably compromised by poor room acoustic. What you heard at RMAF bears no resemblance with what you will hear if you bring the same speaker into your home and do a proper acoustic treatment in your listening room. Even though I wasn't impressed with Wilson Audio at the show, but I have recently heard it in a well-treated room, and it sounded real good!

Don't make the mistake of equating price with quality. Or size with quality. There are plenty of comments and reports on Audiocircle of the recent RMAF show. There are a lot of good reports of smaller scale manufacturers outperforming the big boys. Do a little digging.

Personally, I'm comfortable that I will be able to build a killer system, exactly to my liking from just the manufacturers here on Audiocircle. And actually I'd rather do that than have a system full of "name" brand components.

I like rooting for the underdog. ( or little guy, whichever you prefer )

Cheers

[Daygloworange]

You know, the RMAF is really not a good place to evaluate hi-end audio, all the systems are inevitably compromised by poor room acoustic. What you heard at RMAF bears no resemblance with what you will hear if you bring the same speaker into your home and do a proper acoustic treatment in your listening room. Even though I wasn't impressed with Wilson Audio at the show, but I have recently heard it in a well-treated room, and it sounded real good!

Yeah, there were quite a few people that complained about the lack of treatments in some rooms. I agree, that kinda makes it tough. That really sucks.

But even having said that, still there were alot of smaller manufacturers getting really good reviews despite the circumstances.

Cheers

[Bill Baker]

95bcwh & daygloworange...... you are both correct in my opinion. I do agree you should not equate price or size with quality. You can easily build an exceptional system with examples of any price range and/or physical size.
 Sometime it is the more expensive gear that provides the results you are looking for while others will find their glory in less expensive gear. Those are decisions to be made by the consumer and nobody else. Trust your ears and build your system for yourself, not the critics (or the neighbors )

[JLM]

dayglow,

Don't worry mate, everything is light and breezy (I love that Aussie talk).  I live in the great white north, but haven't been around a snowmobile in almost 40 years.


Frankly gang I don't expect even decent acoustics at shows as most the dealers I've ever visited do zero with room acoustics at their shops.  Some of the better ones try to provide a semi-typical WAF setup.  One skewed a wall to help with standing waves.  But around here I've never seen a treated room in a shop.  Some are just plain stupid and as expected sound dreadful.

Vendors complain about not having time, but for all the exposure something like RMAF or CES provides, I'd be sure to bring a trailer full of treatments/gear and arrive days ahead of time to pick out a "good" room and treat it.  I just don't accept the excuses.

[Eduardo AAVM]

So, Do you think this is just another coincidence from a chinese company ? IMHO, Asia normally copies whatever (from cars, to electronics) and later they find it´s own path, and this is more evident from small companies. But also there are plenty good asian manufacturers providing their own developments and designs and that´s the way to go.

Does form follow function or form follows business ?

http://www.forgings.com.tw/home.html

[Rob Babcock]

So, Do you think this is just another coincidence from a chinese company ? IMHO, Asia normally copies whatever (from cars, to electronics) and later they find it´s own path, and this is more evident from small companies. But also there are plenty good asian manufacturers providing their own developments and designs and that´s the way to go.

Does form follow function or form follows business ?

http://www.forgings.com.tw/home.html

Well, obviously both.  Form may follow function, but that doesn't mean there aren't Asian companies who know a good idea when they copy it.

[nathanm]

That Nautilus knockoff looks like some kind of weird piece of pottery rather than a speaker.  It's like there should be potted plants in there instead of the grille cloth.  I think it's the glazed surface quality of the swirly part.  If it was dull orange it could be a Chia Nautilus!