Nostalgia Based Speaker Designs - Straddling the thin line between clever and stupid?

[GGroch]

There seems to be a mini-boom in new speaker releases that are based upon 60s-80s nostalgia and in some cases technologies.

Wharfedale has just expanded its Denton Heritage Series with a more upscale Linton. JBL's new L 100 Classic revives the egg-crate grill. Klipsch's Heritage series has always been available, but after years of neglect most of the series has just undergone major technological updates.

Perhaps crossing the thin line into stupid territory, Wesley & Kemp's new $1300 a pair CS112 revives the Phenolic Ring Tweeter. In looking at the rear view, they may have missed the boat buy not going all the way with spring loaded or steel thumb screw speaker terminals. Perhaps a Piezo super-tweeter will be included in the upgrade version.

I am ashamed to admit I like most of this stuff, hearkening back to the golden age of audio components. Is there a science based justification for any of these models? Besides of course, the science concerning the impact of confirmation bias on listener experience?

 

[Willem]

Not all of these are technically the same as their predecessors, of course, and fortunately so. In audio there have been two areas of massive sonic improvement. The first was the arrival of digital sources, the second has been in speaker technology. Compare a classic scientifically designed speaker like the BBC's LS3/5a (I have the improved 11 Ohm version bought in 1991 - I will not even mention the early 15 Ohm version, now inevitably completely out of spec) and its distant descendent, the Harbeth P3ESR (I have that too). The LS3/5a is still a pleasant listen, but the new Harbeth is far more accurate. So I fail to understand the attraction of current LS3/5a revival offerings, even though they are not that original anyway.

 

[PierreV]

Give me a few huge Cerwin Vega boxes, a couple of Sansui power amplifiers and a lit floor and I am sure I could do a back flip again . That is, in a way... staying alive.

 

[JJB70]

I suspect an awful lot of stuff is sold much more on the basis of people just taking a liking to it and wanting it than strictly rational and objective reasons. The JBL l100 speakers are a case in point, expensive and unnecessary but I find that I just would like a pair.

 

[617]

The big box three way speaker has a lot of advantages over other systems. The small midrange gives you a smoothly falling power response and great off axis response. Some may prefer the spaciousness of enhanced lower treble dispersion to modern 2 way designs with big waveguides. The large woofer contributes to low midbass distortion.

The move away from these systems was driven by their appearance not for technical reasons. See this:
http://www.jblpro.com/www/products/recording-broadcast/lsr6300-series/lsr6332
For a modern example of a professional 'monkey coffin' design.

Regarding the L100, the original was a sub-optimal design, with the woofer reproducing well into the upper midrange region. Using modern drivers and a more expensive crossover (bigger inductor on the woofer, bigger caps on the midrange) you could do better.

I am currently designing a high value 3 way design using modern drivers and off-axis measurements. Still in the planning stages, but we're looking at the following drivers

Dayton RS270-P - 10" low distortion paper/kevlar woofer which can do an f3 53hz in a sealed small cabinet, or 34 in a 1.5 cu ft vented cabinet
Vifa ne123 midrange - very nice small midrange with neo motor and very extended response
(Possibly - morel midrange dome)
Tweeter tbd, but either a conventional dome like the peerless DX25 double magnet version, a small neo like the CSS LD22, or perhaps the fountek Neo X 3 ribbon. Leaning towards the latter just for fun.

I've found a guy who makes nice cabinets, too, so if the design works, he will offer flat pack baltic birch cabinets for sale online.

 

[Krunok]

Give me a few huge Cerwin Vega boxes, a couple of Sansui power amplifiers and a lit floor and I am sure I could do a back flip again . That is, in a way... staying alive.

Yep, that sounds legit!

Btw, Sansui was actually famous for it's integrated amps, AU series and that stuff.

 

[VMAT4]

Here's a link:
Descended from Epicure Speakers

 

[Purité Audio]

Aren’t all current passive speakers ‘nostalgia based’?
Keith

 

[SIY]

I suspect an awful lot of stuff is sold much more on the basis of people just taking a liking to it and wanting it than strictly rational and objective reasons. The JBL l100 speakers are a case in point, expensive and unnecessary but I find that I just would like a pair.

I irrationally want a pair of Rectilinear IIIs.

 

[617]

Aren’t all current passive speakers ‘nostalgia based’?
Keith

I think any reasonable person would concede that active speakers have enormous advantages over passive, but the reason for their remaining prevalence is not really nostalgia.
- Passive speakers are easily reparable
- Passive speakers are easy for a DIYer to build
- Passive speakers are compatible with most AVRs, which are what a lot of people use to stream music and movies
- Passive speakers can be really tiny, making them appropriate for on-wall use
- Passive speakers allow you to upgrade your amplifier if you want
- Passive speakers require only one pair of wires running to them; active speakers generally have two

For audiophile use, I'm inclined to agree with you. I suspect the issue is that audio retailers don't make much on $ on speakers and like to make a bit more on amplifiers (and cables.)

If I wasn't building more value-oriented speakers for fun, I'd be starting with the hypex dsp modules.

 

[killdozzer]

I think any reasonable person would concede that active speakers have enormous advantages over passive, but the reason for their remaining prevalence is not really nostalgia.
- Passive speakers are easily reparable
- Passive speakers are easy for a DIYer to build
- Passive speakers are compatible with most AVRs, which are what a lot of people use to stream music and movies
- Passive speakers can be really tiny, making them appropriate for on-wall use
- Passive speakers allow you to upgrade your amplifier if you want
- Passive speakers require only one pair of wires running to them; active speakers generally have two

For audiophile use, I'm inclined to agree with you. I suspect the issue is that audio retailers don't make much on $ on speakers and like to make a bit more on amplifiers (and cables.)

If I wasn't building more value-oriented speakers for fun, I'd be starting with the hypex dsp modules.

And the active speakers (especially the wireless ones) have the highest number of wires.

 

[Koeitje]

I like the look of most of these, but not the performance.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

I think there's a general 'mid century' styling nostaliga thing that's been going on for awhile. I lived through the mid century (although very young) and rather like the styling. I didn't much like constantly living under the fear of nuclear conflagration between the US and USSR.

 

[JeffS7444]

I am ashamed to admit I like most of this stuff ... Is there a science based justification for any of these models?

If there's a science of enticing people to buy the products, I'd say it's a definite "maybe".

 

[tomtoo]

http://www.wesleyandkemp.com/new-products/modelcs112

They look like realy cheap diy party basement speakers in the early 80's looked in germany.

No Problem for me, just wouldnt pay that much.

Dont get me wrong i dont say they are bad.

 

[GGroch]

.....They look like realy cheap diy party basement speakers in the early 80's looked in germany...

I think by the 80's phenolic ring tweeters were mostly used in cheap party speakers....very efficient, plays loud, and hard to destroy compared to domes even with just a small cap for a crossover. The not so reputable hifi dealer I workd for in the 80s had a 3 way no name speaker (Matrix MA123) that was simple to sell over more sophisticated name brand speakers because they demoed well.

If there's a science of enticing people to buy the products, I'd say it's a definite "maybe".

I think it is science...and has been a major contributor to loudspeaker design from the start. See this post on Audioholics about the market driven engineering behind the Marantz Imperial 7 . The 7 is probably the most famous speaker to use a phenolic ring and the post states their design goal was to "jump out" from the top selling JBL L100 Century on the sales floor. The writer states the Imperial 6 was technically a much more accurate speaker....but the expensive 7 was much more commercially successful.

Which begs the question, what does "Evidence Based" speaker design mean when talking consumer products? The Marantz used (rudimentary) science to develop the Imperial 7 to jump out at you in demos relative to the technically superior JBL L100, and could be sold at a lot lower price.

Both the JBL and Marantz were extremely successful which inspired these new homage models.

 

[mhardy6647]

I irrationally want a pair of Rectilinear IIIs.

That's irrational, all righty...

 

[GGroch]

For me, Boston Acoustics A200s.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Actually, I want my old, home-built, 2-way, 4 cabinet, external crossover, transmission line speakers from the '70s. I gave/sold them to a friend because I was neurotically obsessed with tweaking them and sought calm. I still miss them

 

[anmpr1]

Wharfedale has just expanded its Denton Heritage Series
I am ashamed to admit I like most of this stuff, hearkening back to the golden age of audio components.

The first real hi-fi system I recall hearing featured large floor standing Wharfedale speakers--it was supposed to have sand filled cabs. This was circa mid to late '60s. The turntable was a Garrard, probably with a Shure cartridge. I don't recall the electronics. The Wharfedales looked like fine furniture.

At the time I was using an all in one stereo--a suitcase like box. The record changer folded down, and one speaker was detachable. You could fold it all up and carry it around. Pretty good sound... for luggage. After hearing the Wharfedales I tried to talk the old man into buying a real hi-fi system, but he told me if it was that important to me I should go out and get a job. LOL

I never really liked most 'high end' approved loudspeakers. When I began to get serious in the hobby the Saul Marantz-Jon Dahlquist DQ-10 was on everyone's mind. It never sounded 'right' to me. I couldn't relate to it very well.

Over the years I've lived with AR-KLH-Advent acoustic suspension speakers, but those never did it for me, either. Tall Acoustats were OK for a while, but I couldn't make them the stop. Then the mini-monitor form factor was all the rage and I went through those. I probably disliked them the most.

Now, getting on in age, the loudspeakers I care to own in my two systems are L100 (originals I bought in the mid '70s) and a pair of La Scala IIs I bought last year. I'm happy. You should always own and listen to whatever makes you happy. Don't let anyone else convince you otherwise, or you'll wind up with something you probably won't like in the long run.