Thin Walled Speakers -Tonian, Musical Affairs, etc

I watched that video. The argument that controlling the wood with bracing to achieve resonance properties similar to that of a violin or a guitar doesn't make sense. Those instruments, by design, are intended to make music over a limited frequency and dynamic response. Loudspeakers are quite different in that they must reproduce over a much larger frequancy response and dynamic range. Also, no mention is made of the phasing capabilities of such construction. Individual instruments have phase cancelling properties, again by design, in order to convey the proper timbre of the instrument. How does then one vreate a resonance function in such a cabinet design that replicates the correct resonance functions of all instruments, with all timbres intact, simultaneously?

It would be impossible to do as you suggest but I bet that's not what the designer was aiming for. The same can be said for very inert cabinets since they, too, cannot cover all the bases. And they don't. Otherwise there would be a formula, of sorts, and everyone would make the same speaker.

Every design is a compromise. All speaker makers settle for less. Some do it better than others.

It's just a different, and successful way of speaker making. Try to listen to one for yourself and it just might change your mind.

All the best,
Nonoise

I'm late to this thread, but I currently own a pair of the Tonian TL-D1s, and previously had owned a pair of high-end Green Mountain Audio speakers. These two designs may very well represent the extreme ends of the spectrum between the resonant and non-resonant.

As discussed above, the TL-D1s have the lightweight, resonant layered plywood cabinets. Green Mountain does away with wooden braced cabinets altogether in favor of a housing that's made from a marble-like "Q-Stone" compound that's basically immune to vibration.

So what's the difference? To my ears, there is no question it's a trade off, and the cabinet design is a major factor. I would say the GMAs have a significantly cleaner sound that is superior when it comes to timbral accuracy and pinpoint imaging. The Tonians, while impressively detailed, sound a little rough around the edges compared with the GMAs, and are far more vulnerable to fatigue.

Part of this, no doubt, is because the Tonians are more efficient than the GMAs, and more capable of revealing nasty stuff upstream in your system. But there's also the sense that the GMAs are these heavy, fixed objects, creating a safe place for an almost photographic, harmonically accurate presentation to occur - the Martin guitar can be identified as a D-28 rather than a D-18, etc.

Likewise, there's a strong sense that the resonant cabinets of the Tonians are exactly what's killing their ability to pull off that trick the way the GMAs do. The Tonians, however, excel at dynamics large and small because of those thin plywood cabinets, and the ribbon tweeter adds a considerable sense of openness and airiness. These two things together make for a presentation that, while obviously distorted to some degree, is far more lively and exciting - and, to my ears, ultimately more convincing. You may not be able to call it a D-18 every time, but you can hear and feel the thing vibrating like it's in the room.

That's not to say the Tonians can't be a little aggravating at times, and I do miss some aspects of the GMAs. If I had to sum it up, I'd say that if the GMAs evoke a painting by Rembrandt, then the Tonians evoke a painting by Van Gogh. While Rembrandt is revered for good reason, a lot of folks would prefer to live with a Van Gogh.

Cluxa,

Nicely put. I recall reading a review of the Tonian Tl-D1s and the reviewer went on to say that although it may not be accurate, it was very convincing which made it so enjoyable to listen to. It kind of mirrors what you say about them.
I still can't fault them, but then I am prejudiced.

All the best,
Nonoise