Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

bowerswilkins.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 174 posts

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#141

Post by JohnBooty »

growt wrote: post #31
JohnBooty wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but 90% of the road can be traveled with just basic, but good components IMHO. Amen. No expert here but I've been in the hobby for a while and have demo'd some high end stuff at audio shows. I strongly believe a really good "90% of the way there" system can be put together for well under $500 retail, or even less if going DIY or used.

Can you give an example of such a <$500 system? I'm genuinely curious.

JBL 305 + 310S matching subwoofer will measure impeccably and play nearly full range with strong bass down to 27ish hz. Would have to catch some sale prices around black friday or some such.

Or this excellent DIY kit and basically, any solid 50-100W ish amp. Might push you up to more like $600. But you get the idea.

https://www.parts-express.com/Amiga-MT-Tower-Speaker-Kit-Wit...

I have a generally very high opinion of Wirecutter's bookshelf speaker and receiver recommendations - any recommended receiver and any recommended bookshelf speaker, basically. Although, most retail bookshelf speakers in this range might be more like an 80% experience not 90% lol.

https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/electronics/audio/

Another thing you can do for a very legitimate hi fi experience on a budget is to turn modest speakers into excellent performers with DSP EQ. Either automatically with a receiver that has e.g. Audyssey auto correction or with a MiniDSP etc.

Audio reproduction is, well, signal reproduction/amplification. Whether a driver produces objectively correct sound via excellence in physical driver construction and engineering, or via a DSP assist, makes little difference.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#142

Post by Gauge_Irrahphe »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #137
Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://a.aliexpress.com/_m0XS3Zr They are a bit underpowered, rumble with Bluetooth, and you need to turn the bass and highs quite a bit down to make them sound flat, but I bet that something like 100x times more expensive studio speakers will be the cheapest setup that matches them in the clarity.

I have a hard time taking your recommendation seriously, unless you have never heard a good set of speakers in person. A pair of JBL 305P MkIIs will absolutely wipe the floor with discount speakers like those, with such a huge margin, that it's not even remotely fair. $300 for a pair, certain a lot less than 100x price difference.

You have not heard those, they absolutely do sound more precise than cheap studio monitors. I think they may actually be flat with both bass and treble all the way down, but then they just don't sound like loudspeakers at all.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#143

Post by brokenmachine »

throw0101a wrote: post #98
electrograv wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This trope that ‘the best audio product for you is a highly subjective personal choice’ directly contradicts decades of well-established science, and is a long-standing myth that plagues this industry — and not coincidentally, serves to sell a ton of over-expensive garbage to under-educated (by design, via marketing bunk) consumers. If you read ASR’s materials on headphone science and the HD800S review in particular,…

> The consensus science shows that for speakers, an “objective best” does exist (such that the objective “best” has extremely high likelihood of sounding best to >95% of people) Are there some product(s) that you can name off the top of your head as examples?

I went with Kef because they measure almost as well as Revel/Genelec, but were much cheaper than either of those options in my country.

Also Kef has a slightly higher directivity than Revel which I believe means that the room makes less difference to the sound than it would with a lower directivity speaker, so therefore it should sound better in worse/smaller rooms. I prefer the aesthetics of Kef over Revel/Genelec as well, but that's a matter of taste.

Very happy with my decision.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#144

Post by KozmoNau7 »

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #142
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a hard time taking your recommendation seriously, unless you have never heard a good set of speakers in person. A pair of JBL 305P MkIIs will absolutely wipe the floor with discount speakers like those, with such a huge margin, that it's not even remotely fair. $300 for a pair, certain a lot less than 100x price difference.

You have not heard those, they absolutely do sound more precise than cheap studio monitors. I think they may actually be flat with both bass and treble all the way down, but then they just don't sound like loudspeakers at all.

I have a very hard time believing that, especially considering the absolutely miniscule woofers, no tweeters and tiny cabinets. The marketing focuses mostly on "cool led lights" and "fashion design". Claiming that they sound better than studio monitors is an extraordinary claim, and there doesn't seem to be any sort of reviews available, and the only videos on Youtube are from people who bought them and basically go "yes, these make sound". Not a single actual review.

The JBLs are some of the most well-regarded studio monitors, routinely besting competitors at four times the price. They are JBL's crowning achievement in sheer performance per dollar, no joke.

I can only conclude that you have literally never heard a decent set of speakers in your life, or you're wasting everyone's time with an extremely low-effort troll.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#145

Post by KozmoNau7 »

JohnBooty wrote: post #140
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of bugs me is that there really aren't any kits and very few DIY designs that match the kind of speakers I really miss, at least not ones focused on home audio. Those speakers being the old-school big boxes with 12-15" woofers, sometimes multiple and usually 3-way designs, sometimes 4-way. Large, heavy, imposing and punchy, big speakers for big music. I know modern speaker drivers have come a long way, but…

The home theater speaker kits from DIYSG should be right up your alley! Lots of 12" and even 15" woofers I think. https://www.diysoundgroup.com/home-theater-speaker-kits.html

Brilliant, thanks!

Now I just need the room to build them, and not have them take up my entire living room.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#146

Post by Gauge_Irrahphe »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #144
Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have not heard those, they absolutely do sound more precise than cheap studio monitors. I think they may actually be flat with both bass and treble all the way down, but then they just don't sound like loudspeakers at all.

I have a very hard time believing that, especially considering the absolutely miniscule woofers, no tweeters and tiny cabinets. The marketing focuses mostly on "cool led lights" and "fashion design". Claiming that they sound better than studio monitors is an extraordinary claim, and there doesn't seem to be any sort of reviews available, and the only videos on Youtube are from people who bought them and basically go…

I understand your disbelief. I was also in disbelief as I expected the speakers to be a joke and wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it myself. But they are as much above cheap studio monitors as the monitors are above regular hifi speakers. I guess there is some DSP magic at play, but they realy sound that good. Really the only way we could resolve this issue is that you waste $30 and listen for yourself.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#147

Post by KozmoNau7 »

Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #146
KozmoNau7 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a very hard time believing that, especially considering the absolutely miniscule woofers, no tweeters and tiny cabinets. The marketing focuses mostly on "cool led lights" and "fashion design". Claiming that they sound better than studio monitors is an extraordinary claim, and there doesn't seem to be any sort of reviews available, and the only videos on Youtube are from people who bought them and basically go…

I understand your disbelief. I was also in disbelief as I expected the speakers to be a joke and wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it myself. But they are as much above cheap studio monitors as the monitors are above regular hifi speakers. I guess there is some DSP magic at play, but they realy sound that good. Really the only way we could resolve this issue is that you waste $30 and listen for yourself.

No, you can't change the laws of physics, especially not with miniscule cabinets, a single 3" woofer, two 1.5" midrange drivers and a paltry ~10W of total amplification. It simply isn't physically possible, no matter how much DSP "magic" you throw at it.

If you're genuinely serious and believe these tiny speakers are truly amazing, please do spend the $30 yourself and send a set to Amir at audiosciencereview.com, so he can put them through the same set of tests and measurements that he uses for HiFi speakers and studio monitors. He doesn't mince words, he will rip apart manufacturer claims if they don't deliver on them, even if they're a well-regarded brand.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#148

Post by CuriousSkeptic »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #133
vnorilo wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe Fraunhofver did a pretty rigorous scientific test that established the CD transparency quality to be around 256kbps mp3. I don't dispute or doubt that. However, obvious encoding artifacts abound on Spotify. Do I have a superhuman hearing? Probably not. My hypothesis is that not everyone authors lossy files as meticulously as Fraunhofver. Also, the performance of mp3 depends on a highly linear and faithful r…

Spotify doesn't use MP3, though. So if you're hearing MP3-specific artifacts (pre-echo, washy "underwater" cymbals), those are probably the result of bad mastering or perhaps using MP3-encoded samples in some tracks. I hear this on some lossless tracks I have, unfortunately if the source material is flawed, there's nothing you can do. Spotify uses Ogg Vorbis, except the lowest bitrate on mobile, which is HE-ACCv2, an…

I did some test with ogg vorbis a while back. I think it was q4 vs q5 that was my limit.

What struck me though was that I couldn’t tell which was “better”.

In the track there was a section where the background drumming on one setting sounded like aluminum drum sticks while the other like wooden drumstick. Very subtle effect, and took some intense concentration to pick out.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#149

Post by Gauge_Irrahphe »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #147
Gauge_Irrahphe wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand your disbelief. I was also in disbelief as I expected the speakers to be a joke and wouldn't believe it if I didn't hear it myself. But they are as much above cheap studio monitors as the monitors are above regular hifi speakers. I guess there is some DSP magic at play, but they realy sound that good. Really the only way we could resolve this issue is that you waste $30 and listen for yourself.

No, you can't change the laws of physics, especially not with miniscule cabinets, a single 3" woofer, two 1.5" midrange drivers and a paltry ~10W of total amplification. It simply isn't physically possible, no matter how much DSP "magic" you throw at it. If you're genuinely serious and believe these tiny speakers are truly amazing, please do spend the $30 yourself and send a set to Amir at audiosciencereview.com, so…

It can reduce the distortion which is what really matters more than frequency balance. The problem as I understand it is the equal loudness curves. The bass itself may be perceived possibly tens of dB quieter in relation to the distortion which occurs an octave or more above the original frequency, so that the perceived distortion is amplified. The measurement should be multiplied by the loudness curves, which shows the trully horrible distortion at bass, which pollutes the sound way up into the mids. Even at that site you can read statements like "below 100Hz, 10% [harmonic distortion] is OK", which just isn't true.

All I can see is that he lives in Seattle, and I don't really care that much.

Re: History of the Nautilus loudspeaker

#150

Post by throw0101a »

electrograv wrote: post #103
throw0101a wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The consensus science shows that for speakers, an “objective best” does exist (such that the objective “best” has extremely high likelihood of sounding best to >95% of people) Are there some product(s) that you can name off the top of your head as examples?

For the absolute best, cost is no object? Genelec 8351B + W371A, Revel F328Be, Dutch & Dutch 8C, Kii Three BXT, and many others. But you really don’t need to pay this much unless you want the absolute best quality AND quantity (capable of going extremely loud, which is an engineering challenge that requires expensive solutions). You may find the “Speaker Attr Comparison” tab here useful to explore the price vs perfor…

> For the absolute best, cost is no object? Genelec 8351B + W371A, Revel F328Be, Dutch & Dutch 8C, Kii Three BXT, and many others.

Yeah, I'll probably be in the price point of B&W, Totem, or Kef. :)

Post reply on HN