Are The Speakers We Purchase Really What They Are Cracked Up To Be?

Never even thought of checking with the distributor as the speakers must be way out of warranty by now. I might look into that.

I'm not really looking to change anything. I think they sound great. It's just that they are 20 years old and that's about the time that people seem to recommend replacing parts in the x-over. And the ferrofluid possibly. So it would just be to get those things done. Plus, the foam around the tweeters needs replacing. That's really all. But, while all of that is being done, I may as well consider higher end parts. Assuming I'd get the same sound but maybe just more of it.

That's pretty crazy. Have to admire the dedication.

 

Your situation is completely different from mine or others with newer speakers. I would think a facelift would be the way to go, new foams, new network, possibly new drivers. There are many very capable companies that can rework old drivers. If I were in your shoes I would do my driver maintenance, then shoot one of them to Danny for an upgrade, you will probably be very pleased!

 

I am not looking to change the way the speakers sound. No doubt Danny would take an axe to them and they would sound completely different. I want the exact same crossover; I'm only interested in higher end parts assuming there are gains to be made there.

I do think that they have a bit of the Harbeth/Spendor thing going on with the cabinets too. At least that's how it sounds.

 

I’ve had my speakers for over 40 years now. The only “upgrading” I’ve ever done is the internal wiring with driver specific Cardas wiring. I suppose installing new crossovers might make sense but as I love their sound I would research what was available. Most crossovers for Klipschorns have been well tested and reviewed so I’ll have a good idea of what I’m getting into if I do it. Meanwhile i am trying to “fine tune” with new electronics.

Be interesting what the ProAc people say. It could be very enlightening.

 

Thankfully the only opinion I consider about my equipment choices is my own. My wife, children and friends are welcome to chime in on anything else.

 

40 years! You'd think caps would need changing by that point but I don't really know a lot about different capacitor types and their lifespans. If the caps are electrolytic, I believe it's about 20 years. Personally, I'd rather be proactive and ensure nothing bad happens because of an old, failing part.

I remember coming across a thread where someone said ProAc mentioned they didn't feel there was any need to worry about old ferrofluid. That puzzled me a little. Assuming that all ferrofluid eventually gums up, and knowing that it's there for a reason, one would think it would need to be changed at some point. But maybe that really only becomes an issue if the tweeters are run hard. Still, I'd rather get it done I think.

I don't think most speakers makers are in the habit of doing maintenance on older models that work just fine. They probably tend to get speakers that have a failure somewhere and just do what is needed to repair that. So if ProAc gets a speaker in due to bad ferrofluid, it's probably already in the form of a failed tweeter and they just replace it with a new one. So in that sense I'm actually not too surprised that they wouldn't worry about this. I haven't actually talked to them though...this information is just hearsay.

 

I’m still extremely happy with my speakers sound. I’ll have to see what happens when I install the new much more powerful amplification. Fortunately Klipschorns are like older cars with easy access to all components and not being computer centric so upgrading things like the crossovers would only come down to making the proper choice.

Still in your case it wouldn’t hurt to contact the manufacturer. It may lead nowhere but you’ll never know till you try.

 

Are the speakers we purchase all they're cracked up to be?

I suppose that depends on your expectations, and awareness that everything is built to a budget.

Peter Comeau, now head of design at IAG, but formerly creator and designer of the Heybrook HB1 speaker in the early 80s, as well as instrumental in the current Wharfedale ranges which are well reviewed and highly rated, has stated on the (I think) Wharefdale 220 that they'd built a high quality speaker, albeit with the constraints of the budget available.

The last passive speaker I used was the Tannoy DC4, a very diminutive standmount that cost £350 in 2011. It's not going to threaten Cerwin Vega's reputation, but it wasn't bass shy by any means. Midrange was a delight and Tannoy's dual concentric drivers have always been a success as far as I can gather. This was no different. Real wood trapezoidal enclosure which was incredible for the money. In my lounge at the time, they were a delight and I listened to them for hours on end.

The last six or seven years I've used active speakers by Acoustic Energy, Quad and currently AVI. The Acoustic Energy's were a revelation - £800 got you a performance way beyond expectation. Blew me away and these days, the AVIs do likewise. A 2013 model and they've been with me for the last couple of years.

As @Agitater pointed out, it's not solely down to the cost of the parts (although AVI didn't skimp on the Sinar Baja drivers or Scanspeak tweeter) but it's the sum of the parts that often deliver greater as a whole.

I'm likewise sceptical of some of these upgrade firms, and recommend, unless you're especially keen, to stick with the as-is. It's what the designers intended.

 

Doesn’t surprise me that a 3 grant speaker has crap inside, since price is fully unrelated to cost of manufacture.
Cost of manufacture and design only dictates the minimum price they can sell it at.
But if there are enough gullible people who can be tricked into paying more for the same thing, why not?
Why would a company make less profit than they could?
After all, the success of a company is measured by the amount of profit made.

Products are as expensive as to what the consumer is willing to pay for.

 

Danny is correct when he says that most mass market speaker designers must adhere to budgets and so compromises are made, sometimes in terms of the quality of the crossover components. But Danny, in the videos I’ve seen, isn’t simply replacing those lower grade components with higher grade ones of the same values. Most of the videos I’ve seen involve him taking measurements of the stock speaker and then designing changes to the crossover itself and THEN using higher grade components. He’s also been tackling internal wiring, new speaker connectors and panel resonance. All of this with the goal of improving the frequency response to his liking.

The rub is, or should be, that you picked those speakers because you presumably liked their sound. With all of the changes Danny makes to speakers they are likely to sound very different and that may be better or worse depending on your preference. It’s NOT a guarantee that you’ll like it, even though you might initially tell yourself you do. Hopefully you do because their resale value is now in question.

I have no problem with Danny and what he offers. His open baffle speakers and servo subs are interesting options if you’re so inclined. I wouldn’t mind hearing them out of curiosity. But different isn’t always better as personal preference varies widely - if it didn’t Harman would be the largest loudspeaker manufacturer in the world and they’d only need one speaker brand that would all sound basically the same albeit with varying frequency responses in terms of how deep they could go. But even they offer speakers that don’t adhere to their target curve and that should tell you something.

So to the original question and speaker, I think the folks at Dynaudio, having the facilities and R&D that they have under one roof hit exactly what THEY were shooting for with the Special 40. It’s up to each of us to determine if it’s a sound WE like and vote with our dollars in terms of value.

 

@wgb113 - very well put. I happen to be a big fan (and owner) of Danny's OB designs, but I completely agree that Danny's ideas of what sounds best isn't for everyone, so one should step cautiously before going down the path of major modifications.

 

Exactly. I would never give him speakers that I love the sound of. And if you don't love the speakers, do you really want to put more money into them, and possibly reduce their resale value in the process?

The fact that you aren't warned of voiding your warranty could also be seen as unethical. IMO, this warning should be on all of GR's videos.

 

To be fair, I haven't seen any posts from people that have modified their speakers using Danny's kits that have been unhappy with the results, and many that have been thrilled. The most critical I have seen is that the improvements weren't worth the cost.

But if you're happy with what you've got, why mess with them. Making any of these mods is not trivial, and will, of course, void any remaining factory warranty you may have.

 

Owner here also. 2 different top hat's on top of H frame subs. Sublime to say the least.

We don't do U toob here either.

 

It would take an audiophile of defined intellectual honesty and fortitude to embark on modifying their own speakers with an aftermarket kit and conclude it was not to the betterment.

In fairness, there is precedence in audio that upgraded parts can claim to improve the sound quality of electronic components. Aesthetix offers a higher cost upgraded phono preamp with ‘Signature’ parts, CAT offers a factory capacitor upgrade to his preamp, CH Precision offers the same approach as to cap upgrades on some of its electronics. So this concept of improving parts therefore improving sound has been floated out into the marketplace and as such, the psyche of the audiophile community. But this claim has never extended to factory upgrades from any speaker manufacturer. So I’d guess therein lies the market niche and the opportunity for the small business independent to exploit.

I have no interest in this amateur speaker upgrade segment of this hobby. But there are lots of small pockets of distinct interests that make this hobby attractive to its participants. It’s a big world and most of us live free, so have at it. Some of the proponents of amateur speaker mods are indefatigable, as the OP of this thread exemplifies. For me, the repetition and brow beating gives me a headache but it is his thread to go as far as the Gorts will allow. But if somebody else buys into it, I hope they enjoy the results and the value such amateur speaker mod kits provide. It’s the grift that keeps on giving.

 

I won't argue with you there .

At the same time, if you look at the crossovers in the higher end models of well-regarded companies like Wilson, Magico, Rockport, Focal, etc., they use very expensive premium components. Perhaps they believe that the use of these components is worth it strictly for the marketing value, but since most consumers don't understand how expensive these parts are, and since these are for-profit companies, I think the designers must feel that the use of these premium parts is justified for the sound they are trying to achieve.

 

amateur speaker mod kit??????????? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to build a crossover. No fancy connector's needed. Just solid solder joints.

 

The challenge in modifying an existing commercial speaker is not necessarily in building the new crossover (although this does require an ability to read a schematic and have reasonable soldering skills). Where it may be complicated is extracting the original crossover (which are often glued in place in a hard to reach area inside the cabinet), and then finding a place to put the new crossover. Better quality components are often larger than the original parts used - sometimes considerably so - and may not easily fit back inside the cabinet.

 

Someone mention internal wiring a few pages back. I found it amusing that Polk marketed “internal wiring by Monster” for a time period many years ago.

 

I saw yesterday that Danny has given some of his background where he designed the crossover for the Usher BE 718 - a quite nice sounding speaker IME and his recommended speaker that he again designed the crossover for is the new Tyler Acoustics speakers - so if one wants to judge Danny's background and experience or quality as a speaker designer then auditioning the Tyler Acoustics might be the best bet. I am not sure they sell in Hong Kong but you guys might be able to hear them in the US and Canada.

 

He has plenty of production speakers out....most of X series kits were production speakers for av123 before they went out of buisness.He also did the crossovers on the 2 Era Design floostanders that they made...he's definitely 1 of the best...i dont agree how he goes about selling his crossover upgrades by trashing other manufacturers work tho...and yes the Tiny Dancer was a very nice speaker...at the time when it was out the cheapest to have a Beryllium tweeter....

 

Thought I would chime in on the GR-Research X-LS Encore speakers. I bought the guts with all x-over upgrades in Jan 2021 and and installed in an old pair of Phase Technology PC-80's after some minor modifications. I really liked the sound when I put them in my system but they seemed a little laid back, albeit very balanced. Around August/September the dynamic range and imaging came alive. The imaging was so good for Bill Evans Waltz for Debby it actually sounded like I was in the club! It was a very noticeable change. It does take time for the components to adjust to each other and drivers to loosen up. These just took longer than any other speaker I have owned. These are the best bookshelf speakers I have ever owned. The bass is deeper in my mid sized listening area which are about 3ft away from the wall. I find myself wanting to listen to music much more and cannot stop (that was my goal). The wife has to stop me some times or she would never be able to watch her shows. LOL

I don't need to use my subs very often when listening with these, but you would need them for a larger room. For example I can get away without a sub for my DECCA pressing of The Who - Who's Next (vinyl) side 1 which has weak bass. Now that GR-Research has options from build it yourself to prebuilt they are accessible to those without the ability to DIY. They beat most bookshelf speakers out there hands down in the +/- $2k range. I tested these with 1 watt of power from an old 90's boom box and it was good, but could not get too loud. I would recommend 4+ watts or better for a tube or class A amp. For the DIY'er, the Amp Camp Amp class A amp would be a good budget choice for these.

My setup is an experiment getting back into 2 channel listening. I used to have the Yamaha CR-2020/AR TT and several bookshelf and tower speakers over time. Wife convinced me, to my dismay, to sell them in 1991.

Emotiva XSP-1/XPA-DR2 with a balanced tube preamp in between with matched Sylvania 50's tubes to add 3D soundstage.
Denon DP-62L TT with a DL-103D MC cart.
Digital streaming from a PC or XBox into a Denon AVR-X4200W HDMI which goes into the XSP-1 Home Theater Bypass for the main speakers. The DAC in the Denon is the AK4458 which is lower level but still pretty good.

I may change things up soon with all tubes or pure class A and a Hana ML cart.

Danny is a pleasure to do business with and knows his stuff.

Hope this helps someone.

 

Update. I decided to do a little test with the X-LS Encores. I removed the massive Emotiva amp out of the mix and put in my tube headphone amp with adapters to directly power the X-LSs. I had to put a 10 ohm wire wound resistor in series because the heap amp can only support down to 16 ohms. By my calculations it was a little over 3 watts. It can get loud enough for the wife to say turn it down. So the little Decware Zen Triode 2 watt is out of the picture unless you do 2 x mono blocks. It has been a long time since I heard tube amps directly (my friend's McIntosh 2 x MC275s as mono blocks). It was a huge treat. I would say buy these if you are on the fence deciding between bookshelf speakers at this or even higher price. The only others would be the CSS Audio Criton which are more expensive, but that is only what I heard from Danny's association and praise, and Randy (Youtube cheapaudioman).

The bass was much clearer and deeper so I just shut off the subs. It really opened up the capabilities of the X-LSs. Little workhorse head amp got pretty hot though.

Listened to:

Vinyl:

Bill Evens Waltz for Debby
Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here - The corrected CBS half speed master

Digital:

Tool - Chocolate Chip Dip - Tests imaging well and didn't disapoint
Beth Hart - Delicious Suprise - Beth's voice can be very harsh on a bad system. They were even cleaner than the Emotiva
Metallica - Enter Sandman - For fun and when wife asked me to turn it down
Steve Miller - Wild Mountain Honey - Has close mic vocals and you can tell if sibilance is an issue. No issues
Eric Clapton - Wonderful Tonight - Needed to play one for the wife

Can you tell I was the kid that took everything apart to see how it worked? LOL

 

I know I'ma year and a half late on this thread, but I was intrigued because all I know of Danny Ritchie is that he designed and built the crossovers on my Usher BE-718. Usher is a Taiwan based speaker builder. The BE-718 are the stand mount 2 ways from their top Dancer line, nicknamed the Tiny Dancers. Usher's Chinese founder designed the crossovers and had them tweaked by Dr Joe D'Appolito. The US importer wanted to make them better, so he hired Ritchie, who redesigned the crossover. That's basically what he's doing with all of his upgrade kits.

The end result was more than mildly successful. Stereophile Loudspeaker of the Year and an Absolute Sound Editor's Choice are among its many awards. Everyone who reviewed it loved it. So I think the criticism that Danny is just some YouTuber with an ax to grind and a bag of parts to sell is a bit unfair.

But what made me post this is the fact that much of this thread was devoted to his re-do of the Dynaudio Special Model 40, which at $3500, is a bit more than the Usher at $2800. I find that particularly funny, because in the Stereophile review of the Be-718, Wes Phillips compares it favorably to Dynaudio's top stand mount at the time, the Confidence C-1, which costs more than twice as much as the Special Model 40. I call that a pretty powerful vote for the idea Danny knows what he's doing.

 

My understanding is Danny Ritchie didn't do any design work on the BE-718 crossover, but swapped in upgraded (more expensive) parts after D'Appolito's design work. Here's a quote from the Stereophile review: The crossover, designed by Tsai Lien-Shui and tweaked for American ears by Joe D'Appolito, is specced by Danny Richie of GR Research, who stuffed it with Sonicaps, Mills resistors, and various goodies from Erse: polypropylene capacitors and high-purity, oxygen-free, copper air-core inductors.

And another from the 6Moons review: He (Joe D'Appolito) is also credited with designing the crossover for the Be-718. What troubles me is Usher promoting the fact that D'Appolito's crossover designs are then sent to yet another designer (Danny Ritchie of GR Research, a US loudspeaker manufacturer) who upgrades certain filter parts to 'better' and almost certainly more costly components.