The mistake armchair speaker snobs make too often


Recently read the comments, briefly, on the Stereophile review of a very interesting speaker. I say it’s interesting because the designers put together two brands I really like together: Mundorf and Scanspeak. I use the same brands in my living room and love the results.

Unfortunately, using off-the-shelf drivers, no matter how well performing, immediately gets arm chair speaker critics, who can’t actually build speakers themselves, and wouldn’t like it if they could, trying to evaluate the speaker based on parts.

First, these critics are 100% never actually going to make a pair of speakers. They only buy name brands. Next, they don’t get how expensive it is to run a retail business.

A speaker maker has to sell a pair of speakers for at least 10x what the drivers cost. I’m sorry but the math of getting a speaker out the door, and getting a retailer to make space for it, plus service overhead, yada yada, means you simply cannot sell a speaker for parts cost. Same for everything on earth.

The last mistake, and this is a doozy, is that the same critics who insist on only custom, in-house drivers, are paying for even cheaper drivers!

I hope you are all sitting down, but big speaker brand names who make their drivers 100% in house sell the speakers for 20x or more of the actual driver cost.

Why do these same speaker snobs keep their mouth shut about name brands but try to take apart small time, efficient builders? Because they can.  The biggest advantage that in-house drivers gives you is that the riff raft ( this is a joke on an old A'gon post which misspelled riff raff) stays silent.  If you are sitting there pricing speakers out on parts cost, shut up and build something, then go sell it.

erik_squires

Imo loudspeaker design is a competition of ideas, a vital part of which is the implementation of those ideas.  Given that most companies have finite resources to invest in product development, it only makes sense to develop and perhaps manufacture major components in-house when that's the most practical (which includes "cost-effective") path to implementing the aforementioned ideas.

Duke

@erik_squires --

My impulse with ATC drivers was to acknowledge their overall excellence first, both sonically and built quality-wise, and thus assuming they’re not cheap. You may be right about them increasing their profit margins doing their own drivers, I wouldn’t know, but rather than an economic rationale as the predominant factor I’d guess the aspects of design execution and production consistency, certainly with the solid engineering capacity at their disposal, is paramount to them. Having heard both the older Seas(?) tweeter-equipped and newer iterations with their own tweeter design, I can attest to the latter being the better offering, and if that means being a profitable move for them on top - well, all power to that.

@erik_squires 

Money is a very poor indicator of speaker performance in our industry,

Part of me agrees with you because I have purchased speakers that offer great performance for not a lot of $ (mostly active but some passive.) I don't know what a good indicator of speaker performance would be I could rely on consistently. What would your list be? 

I think a little historical perspective may be helpful here?

There have been many cases where the "in house" driver was "the thing". The home-grown technology was the differentiator. Pioneers of electrostatic, ribbons, AMTs, etc. placed them on the radar -- and, kept them there. A Japanese company that builds motorcycles and pretty decent musical instruments developed the berryllium dome in house. This is just one example.

Then there’s the case of the Dahquist DQ10. An off the shelf woofer used successfully in a mid-range bookshelf speaker along with an array of "nothing special" components -- including a $5 Motorola plastic piezo super-tweeter. It was the attention to "other" factors that made the speaker a future Audio Hall of Fame’r. More recently, Golden Ear has had success bringing vintage technology that has been somewhat domant back into the spotlight. And uses off the shelf drivers from "others."

I can think of may factors why amanufacture would want to make components "in house", possible supply chain issues being one of them. To me, it’s not the cost of components that is the major factor. It’s whether or not the end user gets their money’s worth at the end. A measure of commerical success is usually a prettty good indicator.

@waytoomuchstuff 

You are reminding me of the Snell A/IIIs, which used inexpensive (but not bad) mids and tweets, along with modified woofers.  What made them special however was the incredible detail to the crossover and the hemispherical baffle the tweeter and mids wer eplaced on. 

Not too different from the Sonus Faber Stradivari IMHO.  The drivers are good, not exotic, but the wide, curved baffle is everything.