A new home for the BG ribbons?

[ThomasW]

Hank

I'd like to but it maybe a little weird with the spacing so close to the frames of the woofers. I'll probably make a trial and error attempt.




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

[Lex]

Good morning DIYers! You guys ever watch the DIY network? I think we should write them about a speaker building contest for Warehouse Warriors and get this, Pit Jon against Thomas, ha! Of course, they could pick their teams, maybe some of you lucky guys, and see who can build the speaker that pleases the judges the best, and the one that performs the best! No Kloning allowed, only original designs.

Have a great day all and as always, keep your glue cap tight. :LOL:

Lex

[PMazz]

I'm more of a Junkyard Wars kinda guy!

I usually cringe every time I see those DIYers swing a hammer in those shows.

Pete

[Lex]

LOL Pete, slow day in the DIY thread. This better mean some big a$$ speakers are being made, right Pete?

Lex

[PMazz]

Well, for now, I'll have to live vicariously thru Tom's endeavours. He'll have already done probably 4-5 iterations while I continue drawing and rambling about them.

I will build these, tho. They are just too compelling. Besides, I'm getting tired of building "regular" speakers.

Pete

[ThomasW]

Jon's traveling for the next 6 weeks so his posting will be a little sparce

I've been getting bids for some major home remodeling, so nope not building any speakers. :cry:




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

[Danny Richie]

This post has been edited by the moderator.

Mr Richie should note that Parts Express is a sponser of HT-Guide.

Those wanting to discuss pricing of GR-Research products; and or the particulars of the GR-Research designs, may contact Mr Richie on his forum at the Harmonic Discord website or via email.

[Hank]

Lex, I've never heard of the D-I-Y network. Is it about people doing their own home repairs and/or woodworking?
Danny, as I posted on the other forum, I'd like to see you guys arrange some sort of objective testing of capacitor types/brands. Maybe you and Thomas could plan such an event at a DIY competition where you'd have several "subjects" who could volunteer. What do you two say to that? I remember a Speaker Builder article from a few years back wherein it was claimed that an audible difference in capacitor types was present. Maybe you two could kick it up a notch.
Baffle width and straight cabinet sides? I'm a student here, so I don't know, but I would think that objective measurement would produce graphs/waterfalls that would show which baffle widths and also which cabinet sides (vertical or angled) worked best with a given tweet/woof configuration. Maybe it could be shown that baffle width and cabinet side angle make a difference with any tweet and woof brand and count. Beyond graphs, objective listening might lead to conclusions. In my mind the baffle width and cabinet side angle differences should be relatively easy to differentiate with performance graphs. That seems easy as compared to trying to "measure" quality capacitors to look for indicators of audible differences.
Well, I jumped into this thread to learn something and to ask for advice on my idea of a very narrow line source that wouldn't break the bank. I have leaned a lot thanks to Jon and Thomas' unselfish sharing of information and experiences. I've learned that you shouldn't do just your mids/tweets in a LS and not do your woofs in a LS also. Also it appears that using 3" or 4" full range drivers isn't the best configuration mainly because of to large a center-to-center spacing and also perhaps even the combined cone surface area of small drivers wouldn't move enough air for some tastes (like mine: orchestra/big band SPL's as well as movies).
I'm very intrigued by the B-G RD ribbons and what I've heard is their best mid/upper mid sound quality. I do think that if I'm going to spend this kind of money, the difference in cost of NEO 8's and RD50's might be worth it since this may be my speaker pair for years to come. Danny, did you notice the compliment from Jon where he implied that your driver selection for the Alpha LS was right on? I can say that they sounded great in my living room! My foray in this thread was to find out if I could build a LS that's narrower/shallower and weighs considerably less than Danny's Alphas also cost less. I'm in a holding pattern now with this difference of opinion on baffle width, which will affect the size/weight of the cabinets. The straight versus angled woofer side of the cabinet think is not as important to me. I posted above that I do like the Apogee "look" and I'm ready to do a non-conventional cabinet for a change.

Let the games begin! But respectfully and with objective measurments/listening tests.

[ThomasW]

Hank

There certainly are audible differences in caps, inductors, or any other object in the signal path. But how audible those differences are is a function of the quality of the ALL the playback equipment. As a result building speakers with mid-fi drivers and then using high-end XO components is a misplaced priority IMO.

As far as a cap shootout is concerned, 'been there-done-that'. Understand that with the 30+ years of our combined team speaker building: added to Jon's working in the high-end aerospace/semi-conductor industry, we have access to components most people are completely unaware of. As a result we pick and choose the appropriate cap (or other XO part) for the project.

When we create a design for the 'public' (Klone-Audio/AudioWorx), we match the quality of the caps (actually all the XO components) with the quality of the drivers. It's the logical thing to do. There's no sense in using hard to find, high $$$$$, esoteric components, for this type of design.

For our personal reference systems we pop for the really good stuff. Most of the time we're not buying the audiophile 'designer' components most people hype. We prefer the high-end 'mil-spec' stuff used in aerospace industry. Here's an example of what we use. This is a 1.2uf, 400Volt, 1/4% tolerance cap. Sorry I should have put a coin in the pic for scale. The cap is 1"dia X 2" long. Care to guess what these puppies cost? Oh yeah they sound REALLY good too.




That being said lets keep this thread on topic.

PS, some people have wondered about Jon and my history together as speaker building team. And whether or not we're just 'amateurs' doing this as a hobby (yeah right ). So I'm putting together a brief 'bio', I'll post a link.




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

[PMazz]

Well, let's see.....If a toilet seat costs the military $800......

I'd be afraid to guess.


It's always great to hear different opinions, but to be honest, most of Danny's post sounds like a commercial.

Just my amateur opinion, of course.

Pete

[Hank]

Thomas, that explains a lot. High-end caps for your personal high-end driver designs. Okay, that makes sense. My background is electronics manufacturing and I have bought custom-made film caps and yes, they're expensive. But you win the prize with a 1/4% tolerance. Like Pete, I wouldn't want to guess the cost, as it probably parallels the toilet seat.

Looks like you and Danny both believe in high-end crossover parts (yes, with the caveat that they be used with quality drivers), so I'll never bring that topic up again. Do you consider your B-G RD50/8" woofer design high-end and therefore calling for the high-end crossover? I would think so, but you guys may have designs in the basement that I haven't even dreamed of.

I'm not quite as sensitive as some people when it comes to speaker designer rivalry showing up in threads like these as long as it's kept respectful. I think Danny was apologizing in his above post, actually

Okay, we're down to a disagreement about woofer-side baffle width and angle. Since I don't view that as subjective, but actually measureable, I won't drop it. Since Danny is the challenger:
Danny, can you place a baffle extension (piece of MDF?) next to the woofer side of an Alpha LS cabinet, take some measurements and post the plots along with plots of an ALPHA LS in its current configuration? And also, do an angled baffle extension? OR, if you guys don't want to measure anything and post it for comparison, I'll respect your wishes and never bring that subject up either? I'm too kind.
Let's see...what questions can I ask:
crossover component differences - NO
wire differences - NO
cabinet dampening materials - NO
baffle width - NO
shit...let me think
:LOL:

[Lex]

Thomas, goodluck with the bids. I recall Jon saying he had quite a busy schedule coming up. We will just have to make do with his occasional "shoot in and shoot out" technique.

Hank, I didn't have DIY network until I picked up a few new cable channels by accident. Not bad, something to watch occasionally.

Lex

[Dennis H]

Could someone briefly summarize Danny's comments? His posting has been deleted and I'm interested in what he had to say.

[ThomasW]

Hank

You or any other individual are free to discuss any aspect of audio. That's why HT-Guide exists.

And yes Jon and I do have a few 'Black-Ops' projects in the pipeline. Details will be provided as the projects are completed.

Dennis H,

Anything pertinant information in the GR-Research post can be readily found either on their forum, or their website. I'm sure any additional information would be available via email.

To everyone else...

Understand in the history of HT-Guide this is the first post I've edited due to content. It wasn't a decision I took lightly.

The GR-Research post was edited because as Pete pointed out, it was in essence a commercial for the company. It's also contained what was basically correspondence directed to me, that would have been more appropriate had it been placed in an email.

Jon and I have deep roots in the high-end audio industry that date back more than 30yrs. As a matter of principle we do not and will not discuss online products in which we have a commercial interest.

As moderators we'll not allow commercial postings from any company. New product announcements/special purchases are allowed if done so in an appropriate manner

Any manfacturers wanting to advertize their products on HT-Guide please contact Lex.




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

[JonMarsh]

Okay, we're down to a disagreement about woofer-side baffle width and angle. Since I don't view that as subjective, but actually measureable, I won't drop it. Since Danny is the challenger:
Danny, can you place a baffle extension (piece of MDF?) next to the woofer side of an Alpha LS cabinet, take some measurements and post the plots along with plots of an ALPHA LS in its current configuration? And also, do an angled baffle extension? OR, if you guys don't want to measure anything and post it for comparison, I'll respect your wishes and never bring that subject up either? I'm too kind.

I didn't see Danny's posts or concerns, but this is sounding a teensy weeny bit like the "discussion" which went on with regards to the Stryke HE15 cube sufwoofer, and the alternative AS-15 design we did.

We didn't like some of the trade-offs of the Stryke cube design, and didn't like some aspects of the sound, that is why we built the AS-15 ported system.




What some people involved in the discussion about the two designs forgot, was that we didn't base our opinion re the Stryke cube on second or third hand accounts, or listening to one in unfamiliar circumstances for 15 minutes with equipment we hadn't setup our selves.

We built a Stryke cube ourselves, refined it, measured it, EQ'd it, and listened to it in systems with which we're quite familiar, and for which we already have "reference" quality subwoofers" (the IB systems).

Many of the folks who were most "upset" by the work we did and our comments were those who had a "vested interest" of one kind or another in the PR cube design. Now, we aren't selling drivers, we aren't selling plans, we aren't selling ANYTHING. We do this for the fun of it, and to share the fun with our friends, old and new.

So, whereas Thomas is working with a dipole angled panel concept with a staggered (and henced smoothed edge diffraction peak, I'll be working with a straight sided conventional box with the baffle size chosen specifically to be integrated with the planned crossover characteristics- see my posts above at the end of thread six. Both are valid approaches, in my opinion, though in my case I'm making a deliberate effort keep the frontal area small, and will accomodate that choice in other aspects of the design.

To make comparisons with measurements requires that the measurements be made with comparable techniques and resolution.

Danny does have some measurements of the Alpha LS posted on his site. By the published graphs, he's using the 3.2 DOS version of CLIO, which doesn't inlcude the MLS paramaters (MLS window interval, filter type) in the graph, as version 4.5

This is an on axis measurement of the Alpha LS. This was not measured in an anechoic chamber and does not reflect a very high degree of accuracy. This was taken at a little over 2 meters away and it is an in room measurement. So room reflections and floor bounce is included in this measurement. Also the further away you measure (or listen) the more the high frequency response (above 15kHz) comes up. For a speaker this size it really needs to be measured much further away

Danny's statement and his plot together are puzzling to me, though. I've done a lot of MLS measurements with various windows, filter types, and smoothing, etc. If an MLS measurement is done with a short window, it will limit the frequency response to the upper bass and above (as in Danny's plot), and it will nearly eliminate most of the room interaction, because the early reflections don't have time to arrive to the mic in the measurement window.

I've also done longer longer MLS measurements (in regards to window length) when I want to see what is happening from both the speaker and the actual room placement and room/speaker interaction. Here's an example, of the MKIII version of the 8" two way we built a few samples of earlier this year.



This is the kind of response curve you get with 1/12th octave filtering (i.e., resolution filtered to every note in a western musical scale), and a measurement window of 60 msec. Though it does show a lot of the little ripples in response which come about due to the room interaction, it also maintains enough resolution to to spot narrow band problems with the speaker itself, including potential diffraction problems which are treatable with front panel soft felt. Danny's measurement would appear to be substantially more smoothed, probably 1/6 or 1/3 octave.

I've also done some measurements of the Neo8; in this case, a two driver array in a 2'X4' baffle. Like Danny, I've always paid a lot of attention to off axis as well as on axis resopnse. Below is a summary of that measurement. Danny suggests that the line array configuration ameliorates the on axis peak- I've never measured the Neo8 in a tall array to be able to confirm this.




Best regards,




Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

[Danny Richie]

Well I think Thomas's deletion of my post was most unfortunate.

I don't consider the reasons he gave for deleting my post to be valid at all.

My only mention of Parts Express was in reference to me responding to Thomas's suggestion to someone that they could clone my Alpha LS kit.

The point was that ordering all the parts from various places would still cost no less than just ordering the kit to start with.

I listed Parts Express as a source for the Neo 8's in an example of what it cost to buy all the Alpha LS parts from other sources. I used them as the example because they are the only other supplier besides myself. If you ask me Parts Express received nothing from what I said except some free advertising.

I also made no attempt to sell or promote anything.

Unless you consider that I thought my efforts put forth in designing the Alpha LS was worth something, therefor there would be more value in purchasing my professionally designed kit rather than expend vast amounts of effort and time to try and clone it as Thomas suggested.

Certainly I think anyone reading the context of what I wrote would see the point I was trying to make and not think I was smearing on some type of salesmanship.

I think my post was deleted because of my response to Thomas directly. I think it might have been easier for him to just delete my post than to respond. He also did not respond to my questions at the home theater forum.

I am also not sure why he thinks it inappropriate for me to direct any comments directly to him on this forum and it be okay for him to direct comments directly to me quoting me on another forum as he did here:

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19960&perpage=30&displa y=&pagenumber=2

I found his response to be sarcastic and having no positive value. I also did not appreciate his suggestion to clone my efforts.

If my responses seemed just as sarcastic right back, then a do apologize.

If a positive exchange is made even on differing views it can be very constructive and many can learn from it. I would rather keep it that way.

Obviously Thomas has no interest in discussing anything I asked of him, and that's okay too. I don't need to convince anyone of anything or feel the need to correct or educate anyone that does not welcome it.

Now, Jon has some questions about something posted on my site, measurements..., and says it puzzles him.

I would like to answer his questions and do so without being accused of trying to sell something please.


Jon:

Danny's statement and his plot together are puzzling to me, though. I've done a lot of MLS measurements with various windows, filter types, and smoothing, etc. If an MLS measurement is done with a short window, it will limit the frequency response to the upper bass and above (as in Danny's plot), and it will nearly eliminate most of the room interaction, because the early reflections don't have time to arrive to the mic in the measurement window.

And pardon me Jon, but I will try to answer this in a way that everyone else understands it besides just you and me. I am not talking down to you. I consider you a very advance hobbyist that could easily make this a profession if you decided to.

Jon you are absolutely correct. A response can be taken in a room by gating the response that will be very accurate and free of any reflections just like a true anechoic chamber measured response.

A time window of 5 to even 8 mil sec. can be observed before any primary room reflections are recorded. This is very easy to do with a stand mounted speaker, especially when on a rather tall stand.

1 meter measurements made this way (not regarding lower frequencies with longer wavelengths) are easy to make, and very accurate.

But, this is not so with a line source.

First of all a 1 meter measurement is of little value, and would be in an area where high frequency comb filtering would be great. It would not reflect a true response.

A 2 meter measurement is not at all far enough away either (like what I have posted on my page). But everyone wants to see some kind of measurement so I posted a 2 meter response.

The problem is that the playing surface extends all the way to the ground so it is hard to distinguish the primary response from the primary reflection.

If the mic is only a few inches below the center of the array then the arrival time of the top woofer is the same as the arrival time of the floor reflection. So there can be added gain in the lower frequencies.

Ideally the line source needs to be at least 10 feet away from all boundaries including the floor to allow a more true response measurement to be made at an adequate distance.

This is not very feasible of coarse. Plus, we don't listen to them that way either.

A measurement that includes the room response is a bit more valuable. See the measurement I made on that same page using continuos pink noise.

http://www.gr-research.com/AlphaLS/measurements.htm

It's the second graph.

Note also this type of measurement will also show the low end response.

+/-2.5 to 3db in an in room response for a speaker of this size and type is actually very good. It is not difficult for some line sources to overload the room and cause room gain and reflection problems especially in lower frequencies.

On a separate issue concerning the Neo 8's peak in the upper octave. It takes eight of them in a line for the comb filtering effect to have enough impact to do away with the peak. It's still not completely gone. At some measuring heights it will still show its face, but no where near the magnitude of a single unit, and I do not see it as large enough to force the signal to those drivers to have to pass through a notch filter that will have some other adverse effects of its own.

Now I hope this post is better received than the last.

I like to believe most people can see when an industry member is pushing sales and when they are not. Keep in mind us Texans do tend to be a bit proud of our work though.

And you guys please let me know if you like me dropping in and participating from time to time or if I should just go. I don't like hints. If I am not welcome here just tell me right up front and I'll be gone.

[Lex]

Well I think Thomas's deletion of my post was most unfortunate.
I don't consider the reasons he gave for deleting my post to be valid at all.

Perhaps so, perhaps not, I can't comment as I did not complete the whole thing at 7:30 in the morning. I wasn't up for it. I started it then stopped. I do recall reference to Thomas being an amateur or hobbyist one, perhaps both. To that I would say HARDLY and anyone that knows these guys at all, can hardly make that comment with a straight face, unless there's some bad sentiment there for some reason.

Thomas and Jon are much more than that. They are ENTHUSIASTS that continually push the envelope in both cloning and original concepts.

My only mention of Parts Express was in reference to me responding to Thomas's suggestion to someone that they could clone my Alpha LS kit.

In my opinion, there was nothing wrong with that. PE sells great products, and if you put your designs out there publically, unless your Bob Carver and patent a square box, someone will try to emulate your designs. To the designer, that should be seen as a complement, not a reason to retaliate against someone.

The point was that ordering all the parts from various places would still cost no less than just ordering the kit to start with.

Perhaps, but then they wouldn't have had the pleasure of doing it theirself. To some, that is more valuable than the end product itself.

I listed Parts Express as a source for the Neo 8's in an example of what it cost to buy all the Alpha LS parts from other sources. I used them as the example because they are the only other supplier besides myself. If you ask me Parts Express received nothing from what I said except some free advertising.

I think you can see what I think is wrong with that statement. Reference of any kind about your own products unless asked could be deemed as advertising.

I also made no attempt to sell or promote anything.

Perhaps not, I can't say one way or the other. But again, any reference to your own products here is deemed as advertising in nature.

Unless you consider that I thought my efforts put forth in designing the Alpha LS was worth something, therefor there would be more value in purchasing my professionally designed kit rather than expend vast amounts of effort and time to try and clone it as Thomas suggested.

Well, there obviously would be more value "to you" in them purchasing a kit from you, rather than assemblying the parts themselves. But it's really not for you to say here that they are wrong by doing so. I don't think it's violates anyone's patents, trademarks, or other legalities. Now does it?

Certainly I think anyone reading the context of what I wrote would see the point I was trying to make and not think I was smearing on some type of salesmanship.

Again, I can't say, I didn't read the whole thing.

I think my post was deleted because of my response to Thomas directly. I think it might have been easier for him to just delete my post than to respond. He also did not respond to my questions at the home theater forum.

Not sure why it was deleted specifically, except trusting thomas's judgement as a moderator. He made the decision, and I stand behind him.

I am also not sure why he thinks it inappropriate for me to direct any comments directly to him on this forum and it be okay for him to direct comments directly to me quoting me on another forum as he did here:

That depends, comments or accusations? The former, yes, the latter no. Those should occur outside the realms of any public forum. We do not exist for one person to publically bash, or otherwise accuse of something, whether valid or invalid.

Link stricken. Linking to other forums for legitimate reasons is fine, to prove a personal point, nope.

I found his response to be sarcastic and having no positive value. I also did not appreciate his suggestion to clone my efforts.

Commenting on what anyone says, whether moderator here or not, that occured someplace else is totally off base, and will be deleted if not by the moderator under attack, by me myself, the owner.

If my responses seemed just as sarcastic right back, then a do apologize.

Perhaps it was, I can't say. But again, it had no place being here to begin with if it was a resonse to something said someplace else.

If a positive exchange is made even on differing views it can be very constructive and many can learn from it. I would rather keep it that way.

I couldn't agree more, that is one large reason forums exist, to foster the education and knowledge of others.

Obviously Thomas has no interest in discussing anything I asked of him, and that's okay too. I don't need to convince anyone of anything or feel the need to correct or educate anyone that does not welcome it.

I have no comment ot this, as I have no idea what Thomas wants to or doesn't want to discuss. Perhaps it was the method of presentation that resulted in lack of response, rather than the point of discussion.

Now, Jon has some questions about something posted on my site, measurements..., and says it puzzles him.

I won't continue to quote and comment on the rest of your post, but I will issue one warning in this regard. Commercial vendors are not to link to their own sites, even for educational purposes or to demonstrate technique or results. If your going to show plots and link to them, they need to be someplace like Geocities, not on a commercial website.

Now Danny, before you think I am coming down hard on you because your a vendor, I am simply telling you the rules. As a vendor myself, I have respect for you, though I don't know much about your business. But, if I as owner of this forum, do not protect my terf, then the value of the only thing we have to sell, namely advertising, has little or no real value at all...

That includes trying to avoid linking to other forums, seen as the competition, and linking to one's own commercial sites. Only links that are absolutely necessary to other forums should be posted. Otherwise, we want to say what is important to be said, here, not read it somewhere else.

You are welcome here, all I ask is that you play by the rules, and leave the accusations at home, or at some other forum, as we just don't operate that way here. Watch linking to commercial sites, and your as welcome as the next guy. Someday, you may want to advertise here, we want to be your friend. But at the same time, we do protect our own, and if accusations are made, they will be sustained, up to and including deleting posts/threads/memberships.

Now, I consider this subject closed, and any further discussion with an accusatory tone will be deleted by me. Now, back to what makes this thread, well, this thread!

Thank you,
Lex
Owner

[ThomasW]

Danny

You are welcome to post here when the posts are appropriate to the subject matter of the thread and aren't commercials for GR-Research products (IMO most of your posts on other forums end up being commercials regardless of the original intent. Others share this opinion as well.).

Also you may not carry over a discussion to this forum that was started on another forum. And should understand that sometimes no reply, is the reply. I have no interest in your so called 'challenge'. I have bigger fish to fry......

I was put off by the rather rude nature of your statements on the HTF thread. So was Pat, who as moderator there chose to edit them. But those statements had no bearing on my editing of your post here.

In addition it would probably be beneficial for you to understand a few things.

Neither Jon nor I are are amateurs or hobbyists. We've been building speakers as a team since 1969. But we do not 'sell' any of the products or projects we show or talk about online. The KloneAudio/Audioworx projects are deliberately created to look like they're made by hobbyists, so that hobbyists will be encouraged to make more sophisticated projects.

Now a bit of history, 'the short version'.............

In the mid 1970's Jon and I joined forces with an acquaintance and formed 'The Boulder Sound Gallery'. It was one of two high end audio salons in Colorado. We were dealers for products from Levinson, Quad, Stax, Acoustat, Magnepan, Dalquist, B&O, Dynavector, Boston Acoustics, Dynaco. Janis Subwoofers, Spectra Acoustics, M & K, and others.

Jon was designing and building Class "D" switching amplifiers in the mid 1970's.

We were building high-end high performance critically damped subwoofers in the mid 1970's.

In the late 1970's we were building and marketing a line of time aligned, phase coherent loudspeakers, utilizing 1st order networks. These speakers would accurately reproduce square waves. They also utilized what is now known as 'constrained layer damping', and had fabric based sound absorbing materials on the baffles.

Working as chief designer and engineer for InterSound, Jon created several pieces of prosound equipment that were used by the likes of The Gratefull Dead, The Dixie Dreggs and other high profile rock bands.

For the last 17 years Jon has worked as a Senior Applications Engineer for the Power MOS-FET Division of Siemens Components and then as a Senior Applications Specialist for A/I Power Semiconductor Applications, Power Supply and Management at Infineon Technologies. Infineon is the semiconductor division of Siemens that was spun-off as a separate corporate entity.

Jon has also published 20 technical 'White Papers' about semi-conductor power applications.

In addition he's a twice published member of the AES (Audio Engineering Society)

He's consulted on semiconductor applications from everything from the Crown K1 and K2 amplifiers to cruise missile power supplies to airbag deployment mechanisms, to satellite receiver systems.

Jon occasionally moonlights as a private design consultant for loudspeaker and audio electronics projects. Contractual limitations do not allow him to name the companies he designs for. One of his more recent amplifier designs was involved in a shootout sponsored by the engineers at a large Nashville recording studio, Jon's design (according to the studio's own engineers) laid waste the studio's Swiss made FM Acoustics power amps.

At times Jon co-ops with Charlie Hansen. (Charlie was the designer and engineer for the original Avalon Acoustics Ascent and Ecllipse loudspeakers, he's now the designer and engineer for Ayre Acoustics).

We currently have two electronics projects in the pipeline. Jon in his copious spare time and for his own use, is designing and building a high resolution upsampling DAC, utilizing a Crystal Semiconductor chip. We're also making complete replacement driver cards utilizing all non-global feedback circuitry, that will retrofit the entire Black Aragon 8000 series of amplifiers. This product maybe marketed. But if/when it is, we will have divested ourselves of all financial interest in it, prior to it being offered for sale.

So I think it safe to say that you don't need to be concerned about talking down to either of us.....

Also when Jon discusses specifics about audio testing and test techniques that's because we have at our disposal and utilize in excess of $250,000.00 of audio test gear.

I hope this information provides a more clear picture of our knowledge and experience.

Regards
Thomas




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio

[ThomasW]

Since this thread has now been completely hijacked so as to deal with Danny's issues and his products (something I attemped to avoid by editing initial GR-Research post and by my ignored suggestion to using email to address his concerns) I'll address some of his concerns, then lock this thread.

1)No one is bashing any GR-Research designs. My statement about the flawed design of BOTH the L***s array and the A**ha LS was a generic reference to trade -off involved in using monopole designs for large hybrid line arrays. I'm a bit of a purist having lived with very large dipole line arrays for the last 15+ years. And feel that the arrays, especially those using planar elements should be built as dipoles with appropriately shaped baffles. This opinion however doesn't preclude others from building anything they desire

2)This is a DIY forum. My statement to Hank to 'copy' the A**ha LS was NOT a literal statement. Danny is correct, the kit is the best way to have that particular speaker. In reality my statement was a generic statement to Hank. It was that a monopole/ hybrid design with a narrow front baffle would best constructed in a manner similar to the A**ha LS .

3)People are WAY over reacting to the concept of 'kloning/cloning/copying. Jon will start a new thread discussing the realities of making 'copies' and what copying implies. We welcome all interested parties to participate in that thread.

4)Since this is a DIY forum inside a larger forum with commercial sponsors, manfacturers may not discuss or refer to their commercial offerings. However they may discuss generic topics such as monopole hybrid planar line arrays. But references, links etc, to specific models or designs are not appropriate here.

I encourage people to start new threads with specific topic headings. Such as monopole hybrid line arrays, or dipole hybrid line arrays, or dipole vs monopole arrays. That way there can be a focused effort toward the specific topic.




theAudioWorx
Klone-Audio