Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers • Hacker News Board

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#81

Post by smolder » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 5:35 PM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #55

mixmastamyk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is what turned to dust in my twenty year old infinitys. They were the cheaper ones but still surprised me.

Same with my Bose. The foam surrounds were short lived. Rubber lasted longer but was not as widely used.

Yeah, foam surrounds are the cheapo stuff, neoprene lasts.

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#82

Post by smolder » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 5:44 PM UTC

Puts wrote: post #40

coldtea wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't you just replace it? We also pay for good cars, but we still change their tires every so often...

Well I guess it's not the wooden box of a speaker that costs $2000-$30000 (normal price range for consumer Hi-Fi speakers). Replacing the speaker drivers would be more like replacing everything within the body of a car.

Beware, if you're spending $10k+ on consumer hifi speakers you're almost definitely getting ripped off.

It costs only a few thousand at most to get the raw parts and materials to build truly world class speakers (quality-wise) that are loud enough for any normal living space. Maybe not for a concert hall type space, but that's not consumer hifi anymore.

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#83

Post by smolder » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 5:46 PM UTC

Blackthorn wrote: post #45

Puts wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I guess it's not the wooden box of a speaker that costs $2000-$30000 (normal price range for consumer Hi-Fi speakers). Replacing the speaker drivers would be more like replacing everything within the body of a car.

How do hifi speaker vendors justify such ridiculous prices when most studio monitors are way better priced than that? Insane.

It's easy to trick people into overspending on audio gear because you can use their love for music and their subjective biases and their egos against them. It's like the perfect situation for slimy sales tactics.

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#84

Post by smolder » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 5:50 PM UTC

Puts wrote: post #48

Blackthorn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do hifi speaker vendors justify such ridiculous prices when most studio monitors are way better priced than that? Insane.

I genuinely wonder the same actually. Seems like there would go even more engineering into making a speaker that is "true" and not coloring the sound as one expects from their monitors.

There's plenty of real engineering but it's only engineers that can differentiate the heavily marketed and absurdly marked up snake oil things from what's real. DIY people share honestly good designs that are underperformed by speakers/amps that cost 10x or more.

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#85

Post by analog31 » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 5:59 PM UTC

smolder wrote: post #81

analog31 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with my Bose. The foam surrounds were short lived. Rubber lasted longer but was not as widely used.

Yeah, foam surrounds are the cheapo stuff, neoprene lasts.

They should use whatever bike innertubes are made out of. I've used innertubes as bungees outdoors, and they're quite durable.

Re: Classic components could be replaced by rubber in next-gen loudspeakers

#86

Post by smolder » Sun, Jun 04, 2023, 6:02 PM UTC

Blackthorn wrote: post #79

pseudosaid wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thats not true. A near-field speaker tends to be a speaker that performs well at closer distances. its obviously implied given its prefix. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_monitor You dont know what you are talking about. “has no meaning” is such a nothing sandwich,

Near field is a property of the space, not the speaker. Would suggest reading https://digistar.cl/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=547

You're right that it's about a space, or a field, which is in the name, but you're wrong in contradicting the other poster. The near field is determined by the radiating surface, the front baffle of the speaker. Room height line arrays for example have a large near field. Near field speakers are those with tuning designed to be flattest when listened to inside the near field. The link you posted is confused and misleading, which is unfortunate since they dressed it up as some kind of "myth busting".