[Double Ugly]

Here are a couple more reveiws, from Pro Audio Review and Independent Review:

http://www.4sptech.com/reviews/par.pdf

http://www.4sptech.com/reviews/bartlett's.pdf

You'll need to copy/paste the second link (bartlett's) into the address bar.  As well, you'll need Adobe Acrobat to read them, but they're well-written and informative.  

They are on the SP Tech site, but not easily found (for me, anyway).  Subsequently, I thought some of you might appreciate quick and easy access to additional reviews/perspectives.

DU

[Aether Audio]

I have the following questions regarding SP Technology Loudspeakers:
1. Prior to discovering your products I was and still am interested in speakers, which utilize ribbon drivers. Proponents of ribbons claim the advantage of their low mass, which improves transient response. Since your products use a conventional dome driver, how do they compare with ribbons regarding transient response?
2. The specifications on your web site indicate that the primary difference between the Time Piece 2.0 and the Continuu ...

Dear Audio Architect,

Thanks for the questions.  You people will never learn, all I need is a soapbox and you're more than willing to provide.  Now you'll be sorry.

Really though, I don't want to offend all you ribbon lovers out there with the following.  In fact, a good ribbon can sound pretty sweet.  They can have issues though and there is a physical mechanism for them.  That's why I'm here.  We believe the educated customer is our best bet.

You mentioned that ribbons are known for their excellent transient response due to their light weight.  This can be true but speed without control can be a dangerous thing.  We were all teenagers once weren't we?  Need I remind you?

The issue here is damping.  In a ribbon, what were dealing with is a stretched membrane (sans sloppy ribbons).  You can find such things in your average drum kit.  Ever notice how drums do not make pure tones when they're struck?  Instead, they make very "strange' sounds compared to other musical instruments.  

If you look in any first year college physics text your liable to find a few paragraphs dedicated to the analysis of the complex and non-harmonic modes of vibration that occur in stretched membranes.  There is always a fundamental tone generated but the higher harmonics are not really what we typically call harmonically related.  These vibrational modes are very discordant and produce the unique (and sometimes irritating) sounds of many percussive instruments.

You have the exact same potential for unwanted modes of vibration in a ribbon driver.  This goes for electrostatic drivers as well.  It makes little difference which half of the electromagnetic force you choose to push the membrane around with.  The only difference is one of conveniece.  Does the designer like to fight with high voltages or multiple magnets?

So, back to damping.  Lets slam that driver membrane with a very short pulse of force and see what happens.  That's what a transient is.  Smack your average snare drum with a drumstick while your at it.  Yes, the drumstick is applying force to a small area of the drum head while the driver is applying force to the whole membrane (supposedly), but the two are more similar than not.  I think you get the idea.

Just like the drumhead, that driver membrane is going to move out (or in) and back - but is that all?  The drumhead keeps on moving and you can bet your sweet Krell that driver membrane will too.  So will a cone to some degree.  If Newton hadn't invented that inertia thing then all would be well (except for the fact that the earth would stop orbiting and instead crash into the sun, ending all life and stretched membrane drivers).

The problem with the membrane is that the only thing that will stop the ensuing "ringing" is the damping effect of the driving amplifier and the inherent "lossiness" that is engineered into the membrane material itself.  That's the most difficult part of ribbon or electrostatic design.  Finding a material that is light enough to work at all and still have a reasonable amount of energy loosing capability.  Such drivers are nothing more than the miniature equivalent of a stretched trampoline.  Once they get excited they have the potential to produce all sorts of discordant tones that were not in the original driving signal.  The harder you drive them, the greater the tendancy to do so.

If you don't believe me, take your favorite ribbon or electrostatic driver and run an impulse response test or ETC (Energy Time Curve) and see what you get.  You might not like what you see.  All those little squiggles after the impulse has past are stuff that ain't suppose to be there.  But never fear - they'll make the music have more "harmonic bloom" - yeah, right.  I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for sale too.

Don't get me wrong, obviously there are manufacturers that have managed to get just the right amount of "eye of newt" in their magic potion, but it ain't easy.  If they were "so bad" then there wouldn't be a market for them.  My only point is that they're not magic at all.  Stretched membrane drivers represent a different set of compromises as compared to cone designs.  Not less, just different.  Maybe even more.

Cone drivers (if properly designed) have the advantage of the increased rigidity of the "cone" shape.  They would be little more than stretched membrane drivers themselves if they didn't.  The cone shape turns, what would otherwise be a floppy circular drumhead, into something that more resembles a rigid "piston."  Pistons are good - they get you to the audio shop and to work the next day so you can make enough money to buy speakers.  They're very rigid and they go back and forth real good.  If they're made right, they don't change they're shape while they're moving back and forth.  If they don't change they're shape while they're moving back and forth then they don't produce stuff that's not supposed to be there.  Simple.

And we all know that stretched membrane drivers are more dynamically limited than dynamic cone drivers(ever wonder why they're called dynamic drivers to begin with?).  If stretched membrane drivers travel too far...Smack! - right into the magnet or electrode.  Just ask any Q--d owner.  The cone driver has the advantage of the long stroke of the voice-coil.  Longer stroke is better.  Just ask your w... - Nevermind.

I could go on about how the large diaphragm area of a stretched membrane driver limits their dispersion and causes variations in their frequency response, but I've beat up enough on them already.  Besides, you all know how picky they are with regards to room placement anyway, as well as their narrow "sweet spot."  If I went into any more detail you'd fall asleep and the "stretched membrane lovers" would be out to kill me.

Huh?  Oh...gotta go, there's this fella named Gwedo at the door and he wants to take me for a ride out in the country.

See you soon (I hope),
 - Bob

[The Oracle]

Hey - I like this guys sense of humour!
Plus - look at the ammunition I can hurl back at my local
Q--d owners  

[audiojerry]

Be careful, Bob is one deceptive guy. While he was making me laugh with his humor, he must have reached inside my wallet, because I'm now out almost 14 hundred bucks!  

Seriously, after fielding all my questions regarding his company, products, and background, I decided to place an order for his Timepiece 2.0. In all his correspondence with me, Bob showed patience, class, sincerity and integrity. His thorough explanations provided me with an impressive picture of his R&D history of speaker design, his well grounded approach to running his new business, and his ability to support his customers and future growth, which I am sure will blossom if his speakers measure up to the quality that I see in the man.

Another point worth mentioning: Bob realizes that I hold my current system and speakers in very high regard, and that I would be surprised if I ended up liking his Timepiece better. Knowing this full well, Bob was still completely agreeable to paying shipping both ways if I decide to return them, and he is so confident in his speaker that he has given me Carte Blanche to post my impressions on this forum no matter what. Bob understands that I will be testing them with both tube amplification (Audio Research VT200), solid state (Odyssey Stratos Extreme Monoblocks), and possibly even digital (Sony AVD-C700ES).      

There is a lead time of about 30 days for Bob to build and ship, so please be patient.

It seems like Indiana is suddenly sprouting a bunch of talented designers -ie: Robert Schult, the cable man,  of Ridge Street Audio.
It must be all those frustrated engineers from Purdue who are not exercising the artistic/creative side of their brains  

[Tuckers]

<NT>

[nathanm]

$1400?  Isn't that the price for EACH?  Are you into mono now Jerry?  I know I'm probably not allowed back into your house after my failed cult initiation attempt but if you wanna come over and stack those against my HR-824s you're welcome to.  My reasoning is that both share many similar design attributes, but one is double the price.  I think it would make an interesting comparison.

SP guys:  What's the reason behind the pay now\COD later thing?  Just curious.

[infiniti driver]

1/2 down, 1/2 COD. Customer service!

I see apex JR has the HR824 Woofers on sale for 27.50. Could come in handy if you need spares.

http://www.apexjr.com/speakerstuff.html

[Double Ugly]

It should be noted that you may reach Bob toll-free @ (877) 324-6800.  It's the same number found on the website, sans the 219 area code.

He mentioned in an earlier post that the web site needs updating, and this is obviously one of the "needs".

Hopefully he's too busy making my speakers to make the changes.  

DU

[LadyDog]

Jerry,
As I also hold your Dyn's in high esteem I am looking forward to your thoughts about the Timepiece. I am fairly close to pulling the trigger myself. An added benefit for me, being a fellow "Hoosier" it is always nice to support my local economy.  

It's hard to exercise your creative side when there is so much "cow tipping" to be done in West Lafayette.

Regards,
Jeff

[audiojerry]

For those interested in an extremely well written narrative on loudspeaker theory, I had time to read the SP Tech tutorial on its website:
http://www.4sptech.com/html/1024X768/home/index.htm

It provides easy to understand explanations on various topics including horn theory, wave guide theory, acoustical impedence, diffraction, impulse response, and radiation patterns.

I must admit that Bob's narrative was was very persuasive at showing  the flaws of other loudspeaker designs, and that his design has been thoroughly researched and supported by solid principles.      

I highly recommend this reading. It has really got me pumped now to get my Timepiece order and find out for myself how his principles have been implemented.

[ehider]

AudioJerry,

Unfortunately I am of the opposite position that this speaker company provided an "extremely well written narrative on loudspeaker theory" via the link you provided. (Good reading yes, feelings and ideas yes, great overview of loudspeaker theory no).

As I read through the designer's ideas, I found that they were just that - ideas! I have nothing wrong with the designer outlining what he did or how he goes about his design, but as I read his material I came up with just more questions that he had not answered in his dissertation of his design!

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not slamming the speaker's website material. It's a very good overview of the designer's view and some of his supposed choices. Unfortunately it is just vague enough (at times) to possibly be a marketing piece! I just don't think there's nearly enough detail on loudspeaker theory here. Just an overview of this company's mantra. After all this company's success depends on sales, right? How do we know that this isn't a marketing piece trying to convince others that this is a truly great speaker that you must buy because "they have considered everything"?

BTW: I've seen other "loudspeaker theory" detail overviews from the likes of companies such as B&W and Martin Logan too (in some of their prior marketing literature). Their products NEVER measured up to their "theory"  IMHO. What did I learn from their theoretical overviews? That words are cheap and technical details that "make sense" can be created out of thin air by a talented marketing person!

[audiojerry]

How do we know that this isn't a marketing piece trying to convince others that this is a truly great speaker that you must buy because "they have considered everything"?

Well Eric,

It's good to get a more skeptical viewpoint.

Of course it is marketing material and intended to persuade the reader. What's wrong with that? Is it illegitimate for a business to market its product? It's all part of the free enterprise machine. In this instance SP's narrative on loudspeaker design was just one more factor in an overall strategy to encourage this potential buyer to consider the product. In truth though, I had already placed my order before reading the theory dissertation.

A far more persuasive factor was the offer of a 30 day in home trial with shipping paid for in both directions, should the buyer decide to return them.

I'm not qualified enough to discount any arguments presented in SP's theory. Because it raised more questions for you than were answered, does that make the arguments invalid? It might make for some interesting discussion if you could state some specific concerns.

Regardless, I have chosen in a way to become AudioCircle's ginea pig with absolutley no risk.    Stay tuned, we'll see if function follows theory.

[Double Ugly]

What did I learn from their theoretical overviews? That words are cheap and technical details that "make sense" can be created out of thin air by a talented marketing person!

Did you read the reviews I linked earlier...by Pro Audio Review and Bruce Bartlett? (To access Bartlett's review, cut/paste the following: www.4sptech.com/reviews/bartlett's.pdf)

I'm particularly interested in your take on the data produced by Bartlett, and whether you believe it to have been "created out of thin air..."

I've ordered the speakers, too, but otherwise have no interest - financial or otherwise - in the company. As I see it, I have nothing to gain except potentially great speakers. If they perform poorly, I've lost nothing but time thanks to the free round-trip shipping, and precious little of that.

If they prove disappointing, I’ll be the first to admit it.  I have no reason not to because, again, it is of little consequence.  The world’s full of good-to-great speakers, and I’ll keep auditioning speakers until I find “the” one.  I can’t and won’t speak for Jerry, but IMHO he's reasonably convinced he already has "the" speaker, and is auditioning the 2.0s out of curiosity as much as anything else.  Again, nothing at stake.

You, however, seem bent on at least implying that they, and to an extent their designer, are frauds without ever hearing them.   I don’t understand that.

I have little at stake in the success or failure of the speakers or SP Technology, but your approach makes me wonder if you might have a bit more.

DU

[infiniti driver]

We have 3 people in the professional audio industry reviewing the speakers.  I personally have never talked to the other two, on the phone or otherwise. It is uncanny that 3 separate parties with separate lives with separate tastes...mind you who whole heartetly are most acustomed to reaching some form of dissagreement openly, would mirror each others thoughts, and one that has lab measurements documented to back up his words.  This my Friends speak volumes of what the SP experience is...and I can also gurantee, someone can have less than stellar results from them... if they do not take the time, caring and feeding, to heed the words of proper set-up and use. To professionals, set-up is second nature. We know how rooms "work" due to thousands of hours of using microphones in said rooms.

It is rare, indeed when 3 engineers of the same field, mirror each others thoughts.

With that, enough said.


If they don't work for you...something upstream or downstream (equipment, wire, room) needs some serious attention.

One of the best attributes of this system is its ability to work well in a vast difference of acoustic situations. This is possably one of the only reasons SP tech is willing to offer the gurantee they do.

Comments from new owners will be not only welcomed, but varification of all that has been said. Remember, thier are "NO" perfect loudspeakers, only ones with the best balance of imperfections, usually work the best.

[ehider]

Here's a better overview of my prior posting so everyone can better understand my two core points along with a clearer overview of other subpoints that I was trying to convey too:

Point #1 - I was ONLY questioning Audiojerry's statement that SP's site represented an "extremely well written narrative on loudspeaker theory". (Not necessarily SP's ideas, nor Sp's product offering, nor SP's design choices. Just the actual subject of "loudspeaker theory" itself! ...a VERY big and complex subject indeed IMHO!)

Point #2 - I STRONGLY feel that we should all be aware and suspicious of ALL technical dissertations, by ANYONE!. This helps us avoid buying into potential marketing slickness that may or may not exist. There's really no way to know the true reasons to why a company truly made all of their design choices. We all hope it was out of research and determination to make the very best product. Unfortunately a good story also sells. Technical mumbo jumbo typically yields MORE money in high end audio. Playing devils' advocate is a very good thing when reading ANY technical dissertation IMHO.

For the sake of clarity, here's a better re-iteration of other subpoints in my prior thread:

  I DO like SP's website! Pleeeeeeeese re-read my last posting: QUOTE: "Don't get me wrong here. I'm not slamming the speaker's website material. It's a very good overview of the designer's view and some of his supposed choices."

  I am NOT critical of their design choices, nor do I think their speakers are anything less than stellar, just because I think their website does NOT qualify as "an extremely well written narrative on loudspeaker theory".  (In my mind, there's a HELL of alot of material to cover to qualify as "an extremely well written narrative on "loudspeaker theory"!)

  I did NOT state that SP had actually created technical details out of thin air! What I pointed out is that MANY speaker companies have the potential to create convincing technical details "out of thin air", and pointed out two abusers that are very successfull speaker companies! (All it takes is a talented technical marketing person!)

  I would like to add some new points here as well:

" I think that SP's website is a fairly well written narrative, on his own personal design choices, with a decent overview of his feelings and design approaches, for his particualar speaker offering"

" I DO hope that these new SP monitors are all they are cracked up to be! We need more superstars in a land of overpriced underachievers! I would love to tout a new speaker offering in the very rare world of great sounding affordable speakers available today!"

[JLM]

ehider:

Thanks for your comments and for taking the time to clarify.  Speaker design is way too complex a field to be covered in a couple of postings and I understand why manufacturer can't be more forthcoming.  


I started this post because:

1.  Of a referal from someone at AA last summer who thought the timepieces were something special;

2.  I agreed with several of the technical points stated on the SP Technology website;

3.  I respect the SP Technology folks for stating their overall design principles and life values on their website.


I appreciate the dialog here, it has helped to clarify the crossover points, it has generated responses from the designer, and it has resulted in a couple of chances for posters among us to trial the products.  I would however advise folks here to keep an open perspective and a thick hide.  It's nearly open firearm deer hunting season here and like the hunters we need to be very sure of what we're shooting at before pulling the trigger.


Thanks to all for continually making this a great site,

jeff

[Double Ugly]

If you say so, ehider.  I still contend your comments have been consistently negative, but that’s my perception and I have no interest in debating you about what you meant.  Despite evidence to the contrary, I'll take your word for it.

For the record, I knew to whom you were referring when you made the comment about creating things out of thin air.  My point wasn't that you made it about SP Tech, but that you chose to make reference to that kind of marketing in an SP Tech thread shortly after accusing the manufacturer of using *gasp" marketing to sell his product (as Jerry so adeptly pointed out).  Intended or not, I believe the implication is clear.

That said, I agree with much of what you say.  I suppose the way you said it and the zeal with which you presented it hit me the wrong way.  If I’ve misrepresented your words or intentions in any way, I apologize.

DU

[jmtjoy]

I've been following this thread with great interest and I have spoken to Bob Smith re: his speakers. I do not own a pair of his speakers -YET.

I've been looking to upgrade to new speakers for quite some time. It is truly mind boggling how many choices are out there that's for sure! I currently own Nuance 440's a speaker designed by Winslow Burhoe (pioneering speaker designer of AR/KLH/EPI/Epicure fame). They have been an enjoyable speaker but they have limits and compromises. Curently, Factory direct companies seem to offer the most value overall (I have looked at VMPS, Newform Research, BESL, GR Research and others) . Their use of no-compromise parts is attractive. I have also been following the product developments of Canadian speaker companies such as PSB, Axiom, Paradigm, Mirage, Totem, Nuance, Studiolab and others. I have owned Kef 102, Spica TC50, and Paradigm speakers in the past.

I still believe in the basic principle of Winslow's 2 way speaker module or mutiples of this module consisting of an 7-8" woofer crossed over as low as possible to a tweeter using Linkwitz-Reilly allignments. This creates the most musically satisfying sound to my ears so far. Simplicity is key here I think. Joh Bau's design in the Spica TC-50 was also a simple design with great musical effect. A legendary speaker for sure.

I have seen this principle implemented in lower cost designs such as some earlier speakers that Winslow designed for Nuance. (330's, Spatial 3CLS-A brand that has gotten bad raps because of many people who paid ridiculous prices for these speakers). The weakness in these designs is in overall parts quality I believe. These speakers could play cleanly only to certain levels at which distortion and compresssion rise dramatically.  A proprietary wave-guide was used for unifiorm off-axis response and power response with great spatial and lively effect. The results were pretty incredible especially considering that the parts used would definitely not be considered on par to what Bob is using. I have been looking to find a speaker that shared some similar design principles but one that raised the wick so to speak with regards to driver quality, accuracy, detail, power handling/reduction in compression, better cabinetry/resonance control, and better crossover parts.

I have a good feeling about Bob's Timepiece 2.0's. A speaker that I am considering upgrading to. As noted in a review on these speakers-they are "Expensive (but worth it)". But compared to what else is out there, these may well be the best designed 2 way speaker in the world and a great value. The market is so chuck full of mediocre products that are touted as being the next best thing. I'm sure many will think of Bob's speakers the exact same way. But, I am definitely going to go hear these as soon as possible and will make the drive from Southern, Ontario Canada to do so.

Now only if Nuance would have taken their designs up to the next level with respect to parts quality and kept Winslow Burhoe as designer! Then I'd probably own a new pair.

Talk to you soon Bob. Gotta start saving some more loonies.

Jeff

[audiojerry]

Extremely well written, Eric. That's my position, and I'm sticking to it. It was concise, eloquent, easy to understand, nicely supported by diagrams, logical, and persuasive.

Because it raised more questions than answers for you doesn't weaken my position.

It seems to me that your main issue is that you believe the whole intent of the narrative was to promote and market the designer's product, and you seem to suggest that deception was masked in SP's approach. You then support your argument by associating it with similar marketing hype from other manufacturers.  

Do you believe that the SP narrative has the ability to convince a customer that he made the right choice regardless of his audition experience? Of course not. I believe that SP's website material does a good job of stating its case and why it believes the reader should audition their product. SP can gain nothing by strongly promoting a mediocre product, and offering a 100% no-risk guarantee. In fact, this would be a pretty speedy road to bankruptcy.

If you were shopping for speakers, would you not consider SP Tech because you take issue with their deceptive(in your view) marketing?

[nathanm]

There's a ton of audio design philisophical rambling on websites the world over.  Some of it is pure marketing horseshit and some of it is real.  No matter who wrote it, it is there to make you want to buy their stuff.

Really all that matters is what the speakers sound like. When Jerry gets them he will see if he is drawn into a private prison of myopic ignorance and slumber or if these speakers are of of Divine origin, possessing a transfinite potential and nested as a sub-set within a Super-Universe of infinite dimensions that is ruled by Absolute Truth and Natural Law.