The cunning trick utilized within the speaker industry

@kenjit

All i see is rectangular boxes.

Perhaps you are not looking in the right places?

Here’s are just few that I do not regard as "rectangular boxes"

https://us.kef.com/kef-blade.html

http://www.gershmanacoustics.com/gershman_speaker_modles.html

https://www.avantgarde-acoustic.de/en/customer-galleries.html

https://www.focal.com/en/home-audio/high-fidelity-speakers/utopia-iii-evo/floorstanding-speakers/maestro-utopia-evo

If sound quality has improved, it would be evident in the measurements. Without those its just your say so.

Question:- how would you measure size of image?
Question - how would you measure "speaker transparency" ?
Question - how would you measure dynamics?

ALL of the above can easily be observed
- alas, the first two are affected by the acoustics of the listening room
------ so it is down to YOUR EARS to discern the difference
- Dynamics is measurable/chartable, but manufacturers do not divulge it, probably because it is HEAVILY influenced by the cables you are using.

YES - the developments I cite may have been around for many years in $$$high end products, but now they are available to the masses, not just the wealthy few.

Personally - I do not feel duped, because I have taken the time to find products that excel in their field. The sound I now experience in my system is a vast improvement over the system I had 20 years ago.

What tools did I use? - my humble ears.

If you rely on "measurements" to tell you something sounds good in this hobby you are doomed !

There is no substitute for actually "LISTENING"

Regards - Steve

@kenjit - WRT....

If we look back at the speaker measurements in the reviews by Mr Atkinson, over the past 20 years, do we see a steady upward progression in frequency response flatness? Has there been a progression in any aspect of the measurements over that period?
No there has not.

Frequency response and flatness are probably the two LEAST Significant measurements ever posted about speakers, because most speakers can compete with each other based on those measurements.

There are so many more propertieis/attributes that one should look at e.g.

- cabinet design - e.g.
----- internal baffles to reduce internal standing waves
----- bracing and curved sides to reduce cabinet vibrations
----- front panel design to improve imaging
- driver development e.g.
----- "super tweeters" exceeding 50kHz (not audible - but supposedly affect overall speaker performance)
----- new materials to improve longevity, dynamics, clarity and details
----- new technologies, such as plasma tweeters, Dome mid range etc...
- driver placement and mounting
----- to improve imaging
----- to improve time alignment
- cross over design e.g.
----- better parts - improves in imaging and dynamic performance
----- better crossover designs (fewer parts) improves imaging, clarity
- anechoic chamber analysis to ensure unwanted "properties" are identified and dealt with

And those are just a few attributes I can think of without getting into the nitty-gritty details

Speakers, on the whole, are so much better today AND you get much better performance for a more affordable price.

Granted, there are some very pricey speakers out there. But if you look around the $1000/pair range you can get some very nice sounding speakers i.e. compared to 20 years ago...

You have small (bookshelf sized) speakers pumping out amazing bass with very good imaging.

You have speakers that melt into their surroundings to produce amazing "concert like" reproduction

You have active speakers with great dynamics and superb LFE frequency response

So - I really think your initial statement is not really doing the speaker industry any justice.

YES - there are some very good speakers from 20 years ago that can compete with (and better) many more modern speakers, but back then those speakers were "comparatively" pricey. Tannoy and Quad come to mind, but there are many others also.

I like the speakers of today and what they offer to the consumer

Having said that - My Gersnman Acoustics Sonogram speakers are a 10-12 year old design, but they were really ahead of their time back then, i.e. from a design perspective.

Regards - Steve

@asvjerry - question - have you ever auditioned the speakers in the link you provided?

The reason for my question - the Germans hardly ever do anything unless it works really really well. Much less, invest in what looks like a small fortune developing that particular line of speakers.

Similar claims could be made about another less conventional speaker design i.e. the Avantgarde horn speakers - another amazing product from Germany.

Now those I have auditioned and they leave most other speakers three times their price sounding dull and lifeless

So forgive me if I’m a little skeptical about your claims and concerns, but my money is on the Germans in this case

HOWEVER - if you HAVE auditioned the speakers you provided a link too and they sounded awful, then I will trust YOUR ears.

It seems to be a common approach on Agon that just because some people don’t understand how a particular design/development might be of benefit - it automatically makes it ...

"a very expensive 55 gallon drum of snake oil."

I for one - prefer to keep an open mind :-)

Regards - Steve

@asvjerry - "J" - thanks for the "War and Peace" soliloquy :-)

Actually, I found it interesting and useful.

From the picture you have provided, it would appear you have considerable practical knowledge in this area - kudos.

Alas - as far as the Gaudi’s. Esp. the Mk3
- I still believe the Germans are very good at what they do (in general)

But - I do agree that features such as -
"having that array move back ’n forth in tandem by itself "
- might be more of a "gimmick", perhaps to tempt those that have invested in the previous model?

However - since you have significantly more knowledge than myself in this area, I have a couple of questions regarding the advantages and drawbacks regarding radiator style of speakers in a "conventional" room (e.g. say 15’ x 20’)

1. I (rightly or wrongly) believe they have issues with reflected sound and the amount of space required around each speaker - is that the case?
2. is an accurate image achievable with this style of speaker? if so , what might be the "minimal" room ans speaker spacing  requirements?

I looked at this style of speaker some 30 years ago, but discounted it mainly because it appeared to require more space than I had available at the time, in order to recreate an "believable" image.
I considered it to be up there with "Maggies", which I had observed, as having great imaging, but they required a larger than "normal" room with lots of space behind and to the sides of each speaker and treatments strategically placed on the walls & ceiling.

Looking forward to a "concise" reply :-)

Many thanks "S"