Linkwitz LX521 info

[markk]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

As much as I admire SL, there appears to be a Steve Jobs type of reality distortion field surrounding him.

There really isn't much new here except that SL changed his mind about how high up the dipole response should be. When he brought his original orions to one of our DIY's in 2001, the question was asked, "shouldn't the dipole response go higher (than 1.4k)?" SL dismissed it at the time. I can't recall the exact reasoning but it was something along the lines of he'd investigated that and did not find it fruitful. The same sort of response about the rear tweeter, really.

So again, there isn't anything new. SL just changed his mind and is doing what we all thought made more theoretical sense a decade ago.

john's been doing this for a while now if you've been following the forums. Hard to say he's stealing SL's idea unless you're in the reality distortion field.

[Jeff B.]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

As much as I admire SL, there appears to be a Steve Jobs type of reality distortion field surrounding him.

There really isn't much new here except that SL changed his mind about how high up the dipole response should be. When he brought his original orions to one of our DIY's in 2001, the question was asked, "shouldn't the dipole response go higher (than 1.4k)?" SL dismissed it at the time. I can't recall the exact reasoning but it was something along the lines of he'd investigated that and did not find it fruitful. The same sort of response about the rear tweeter, really.

So again, there isn't anything new. SL just changed his mind and is doing what we all thought made more theoretical sense a decade ago.

john's been doing this for a while now if you've been following the forums. Hard to say he's stealing SL's idea unless you're in the reality distortion field.

I agree. It does certainly appear to someone who has been following the developments in the area of dipole design, that over the last several years John is the one who has pioneered many of the advances and shifts in thinking and "others" have followed. The timelines aren't hard to put together.

[Jeff B.]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Technical criticisim is fine. It is a fine line when you have commercial interest in selling plans (and future kits?) for a design that is in direct competition with another commercial offering be it a kit or plans.

In principle, I couldn't agree more. I ran into precisely this type of thing with regard to how my Triton speaker was criticized by another party on a couple of forums - who was trying to sell his own kit using the same drivers, but not really disclosing that while criticizing my design. I am still a bit put-off by it, but I won't make the same mistake again. I am generous to the community, but I won't be used.

I am not convinced that John is guilty of the same thing though, based on how his designs and thoughts have developed.

[charlielaub]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Maybe we can take this thread in a new direction....

I'd like to say a few things about one weakness that I found with Mr. Linkwitz's new effort: the upper bass/lower midrange. When the system was playing loudly in the room at BA, I definitely heard strain/distortion in this frequency band. Based on his description and total conjecture on my part, I wonder if his choice for the "lower midrange driver" is really a wise one. The crossover is around 120 Hz, and the driver is an 8" (the Seas SEAS U22REX/P-SL with +/-4mm Xmax). Based on the excursion demands for OB use around the 120 Hz crossover point, I think that this driver is running out of gas at high volumes. Of course it could also be the case that his amps were clipping... not sure. But I definitely heard this problem several times. Since he is crossing over to a smaller midrange higher up, I am not sure why SL did not choose a larger driver in place of the U22. A 10" could still work well up to the 1k Hz crossover point...

-Charlie

[Deward Hastings]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

there isn't anything new. SL just changed his mind and is doing what we all thought made more theoretical sense a decade ago.

Speaking as one who had "full range" dipoles 30+ years, and who argued that ORION should be . . . yes. SL did not invent "full range" dipoles. Neither did John K.

Hard to say he's stealing SL's idea

Who said that? (apart from John claiming that someone would . . .). John's designs would probably be a lot better if he was . . . (he seems to waste a lot of time just trying to be "different"). But the whole "I thought of it first" thing is just unseemly . . . pointless and incorrect. Most of these ideas have been around since at least the 60's . . . read discussions about the KLH 9 or Quad. Then there was Magnepan. And then SL demonstrated that it was practical to make (nearly) full range dipoles with dynamic drivers. All quite a while ago. SL freely acknowledges being inspired by dipole designs before his own, and most if not all of the concepts we wrestle with today (narrow baffles included) were discussed on the Linkwitzlab site from its inception. They were not novel even then.

SL had done a lot of development work since then, and designed a couple of excellent speakers. John K has produced some useful models and simulations. But for an "education" in dipole design the decade-old "Phoenix" pages at the Linkwitzlab site are still the "place to go". Everything since is essentially derivative . . .

[Deward Hastings]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Based on the excursion demands for OB use around the 120 Hz crossover point, I think that this driver is running out of gas at high volumes.

I didn't hear that any of the times I was listening, but I didn't hear them "cranked up", either. There's been recent discussion on OPLUG regarding the LM/UM/T (or is it M/LT/UT) division and how to implement that in a possible ORION upgrade, and some hinting at baffle effects . . . the smaller baffle does put greater load (higher excursion requirement) on the lower mid. It's an area where the W22 (used in ORION) already has significant advantage . . . and it's on a bigger baffle, too. ORION tends to be limited by the woofers, not the mid . . . roles may be reversed with LX521. Everything has to run out of steam somewhere . . .

[johnk...]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Thanks guy, but let it go. I'll take the usual beating. I'm well aware that when I post something about an SL design or web publication I'm treading on hallowed ground. What can I say, I was just born of the wrong parents with the wrong initials. But I have had great exchanges with other industry giants without such negativity. It's part of the marketing. The speaker gets introduced all over the web, here, DIY audio, HTGuide, AudioCircle.... And it always the Bee's Knees, better than all the rest, better than the last speaker (which was the supposed to be the last speaker you'll ever own). IT"S and F'in SPEAKER for crying out loud. How "good" can it be? I think I should be on retainer. I'm sure my contributions and controversy only enhances the discussion and the desire to buy into the clan.

Anyway, I'm sure the revised Note will blow it's doors off! :

[fdieck]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

I am not certain either and have the greatest respect for the work he has done. But.... when one critics someones design, with even valid technical points, don't be petty when they use those ideas in a commercial product. You decide ahead of time if advancing the state of art by sharing your knowledge is worth the risk of being being an unpaid consultant. When criticize someones design don't be petty when they take your advice. When they
have the following, credentials, and contacts in the industry to get wide exposure don't ride on their coat tails while announcing that your design is cheaper, better designed, and more origional. People will just see it as oppretunism.

The sophistication and availability of free or inexpensive design tools, as well as the incredible exposure provided by the web, has blured the distinction between hobbist and design engineer. Nelson Pass has been one of the few people able seperate both his commercial amplifier efforts (Pass Labs) and his wonderful DIY designs. His other company First Watt creats a new business model by creating designs that begin as commerical designs that become public domain after a given period of time. What I believe makes him so successful in this, is his absolute love for his craft and civility towards his competitors and critics.

[johnk...]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Who said that? (apart from John claiming that someone would . . .). John's designs would probably be a lot better if he was . . . (he seems to waste a lot of time just trying to be "different").

Dewardh, I have tried to be servile with you over at DIY Audio, but at this point I have two words for you which I can not post.

[johnk...]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

I didn't hear that any of the times I was listening, but I didn't hear them "cranked up", either. There's been recent discussion on OPLUG regarding the LM/UM/T (or is it M/LT/UT) division and how to implement that in a possible ORION upgrade, and some hinting at baffle effects . . . the smaller baffle does put greater load (higher excursion requirement) on the lower mid. It's an area where the W22 (used in ORION) already has significant advantage . . . and it's on a bigger baffle, too. ORION tends to be limited by the woofers, not the mid . . . roles may be reversed with LX521. Everything has to run out of steam somewhere . . .

And I wasn't going to go there. But now that you brought it up.....

[fdieck]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

John it is unfortunate you feel that way even though there is probable some truth in it. Nobody said the world was fair. There are objective people out there who are interested in what you are doing. Build some speakers get them out there and and let them speak for themselves, if you will forgive the pun. If it makes any difference, I felt the NaO note was a superior approach to the Orion. It may be that Mr. Linkwitz did as well..... ;)

[Deward Hastings]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

And I wasn't going to go there.

Why not? The tradeoffs associated with narrow baffles are no secret. I'm still contemplating all the ramifications of the new design . . . it's easy to criticize choices we've agreed neither of us would have made . . . not so easy to pause and consider why. Just because the reasons for it are not immediately obvious doesn't mean that there aren't any, or that the benefits are not worth it.

Dewardh, I have tried to be servile with you over at DIY Audio,.

“Servile” is not necessary, civil will do . . .

but at this point I have two words for you which I can not post.

Why not? Still under copyright? :rolleyes:

[johnk...]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

I am not certain either and have the greatest respect for the work he has done. But.... when one critics someones design, with even valid technical points, don't be petty when they use those ideas in a commercial product.

I would have no problem if SL decides to move the a higher order mid coupler or make the upper mid/tweeter the passive crossover and move the active between the mids. As I have stated several times, I contacted SL by email and suggest just that. It's his choice. Some of you just don't seem to understand that I have no commercial interest. I am DIY 100% and offer my design 'casue I want to shair them. I won't even consider building an active or passive crossover anymore. I've lowered the prices of the plans for the NaO II and Note. I charge for them only because of ther time invested and the cost of PC boards. I've turned down offers to take my speakers commercial. I not longer colaborate with Bohdan un the Bozdzio Ultimate Equalizer. I don't want the headaches of a commecrial venture. Let's get over this.

Flash reveals grill frame.

[fdieck]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

As much as I admire SL, there appears to be a Steve Jobs type of reality distortion field surrounding him.

There really isn't much new here except that SL changed his mind about how high up the dipole response should be. When he brought his original orions to one of our DIY's in 2001, the question was asked, "shouldn't the dipole response go higher (than 1.4k)?" SL dismissed it at the time. I can't recall the exact reasoning but it was something along the lines of he'd investigated that and did not find it fruitful. The same sort of response about the rear tweeter, really.

So again, there isn't anything new. SL just changed his mind and is doing what we all thought made more theoretical sense a decade ago.

john's been doing this for a while now if you've been following the forums. Hard to say he's stealing SL's idea unless you're in the reality distortion field.

I think it is a little cynical to presume SLs intentions or reasons for the new speaker. It is in many ways besides the previously discussed, quite a departure from the Orion in terms of new driver materials. I am sure he is aware that many Orion owners are probably annoyed that he taken a new approach and obsoleted the design for one with less expensive drivers and a radically different enclosure. Completely unlike the typical new Apple product, I think the LX521 has much less snob appeal and represents an honest effort to improve the sonics and not just measurements and cosmetics. No one is sayin John K is stealing from SL and I don't think anyone would make the assertion that SL has stold from John K. He has acknowledged John's work.

A passive midrange crossover was bound to cause criticism but keep cost and complexity down. Information about the network was made available and the simple network is easy for anyone to add to an additonal amplifier. He might be testing the water for further options as to active and passive crossover variation. For those who know what very good large value caps cost he should be applauded for keeping the passive network simple. A comparison to Steve Jobs.... I think not! Here we have some (friendly I hope) rivalry that should benefit the state of the art.

[johnk...]

Re: Linkwitz LX521 info

Why not? The tradeoffs associated with narrow baffles are no secret. I'm still contemplating all the ramifications of the new design . . . it's easy to criticize choices we've agreed neither of us would have made . . . not so easy to pause and consider why. Just because the reasons for it are not immediately obvious doesn't mean that there aren't any, or that the benefits are not worth it.

Sorry about that. Sometimes my hot Italian side can't control my hot Russian side.

About the baffle, other than a slightly bigger baffle which will improve max SPL slightly, I don't see any advantage or disadvantage to it. It isn't something that I believe would alter performance, as opposed to the crossover which real life experience tells me could make a difference.