Zaph versus GR Research

[hongrn]

Very interesting reading...

<A HREF="http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i...?topic=37859.0">http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/i...?topic=37859.0</A>

Hongster

[tomdaugherty]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


Good find Hong. That was an interesting read. I have built several AV-1's and AV-2's. They do sound very nice. And, I have a set of speakers using the Extremis also very nice sounding. Thanks for pointing us to the discussion. Tom Daugherty

[thylantyr]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


Zaph ****************************************
"GR M130 - coated paper cone, plastic frame w/6 holes, fake phase plug, good motor venting. Breakup node at 5.5kHz with energy storage problem. Strange suckout at 1900hz, not visible in gated or smoothed curves."
*********************************************

Danny ***************************************
"First of all the frame is NOT plastic. The frame is a high strength polymer
*********************************************

Ok, so it's plastic. lol

Danny ***************************************
"Secondly, the dust cap is NOT a fake phase plug. The shape and type of dust cap was selected for specific reasons. This dust cap was compared to several other types. It added some mass that was desired, and it gave the smoothest response than with others tested."
*********************************************

It's not uncommon for a driver with a dust
cap that appears to be a 'fake phase plug' be
called a fake phase plug, no big deal here.

Danny ***************************************
"Thirdly there is NO breakup node at 5.5kHz or energy storage problem in that area. In fact if you look at the cumulative spectral decay of all three woofers tested you will not only see that there is no energy storage problem at 5.5kHz but it is the cleanest in that area of all that were tested.

There is also no strange suck outs at 1900Hz. This may have been an artifact of the way that they were measured (in the near field). If it is there when not gated but not there when gated then it is clearly an artifact of a cancellation from a late arriving reflection."
*********************************************

I think I missed it, where's the test data
to support this claim ?

Danny ***************************************
<A HREF="http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm">http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm</A>

Typical observations regarding speaker burn in involves an opening up or relaxing of the presentation. Vocals will appear less strained or congested. The sound smooths out. Bass response appears cleaner, tighter, less distorted, and even deeper. These same observations are reported day in and day out by people all over the world and is very consistent.
********************************************

Danny has a history of believing in 'audio voodoo', I've seen posts in cyber over many
years. This is a good example of audio voodoo
at work. It's BS.

First, nobody will dispute that a driver specs
can change due to it's mechanics, but to make
claims that these changes always guarantees better
sound is totally BS. Changing a few driver T/S
parameters will not guarantee better sound.

Danny ***************************************
I really have had little interest in responding to this as I have not had time to bother with it and really didn't feel like enough people were paying any attention to this insignificant site.
********************************************

... LOL ...

[unknownuser]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


"Danny has a history of believing in 'audio voodoo', I've seen posts in cyber over many
years. This is a good example of audio voodoo
at work. It's BS."

And this is coming from a guy who thinks that anybody who spends over $200 on a cd player is wasting his money? Where's YOUR test data to support that B.S.?

> Zaph
> ****************************************
> "GR M130 - coated paper cone, plastic
> frame w/6 holes, fake phase plug, good motor
> venting. Breakup node at 5.5kHz with energy
> storage problem. Strange suckout at 1900hz,
> not visible in gated or smoothed
> curves."
>
> *********************************************

> Danny
> ***************************************
> "First of all the frame is NOT plastic.
> The frame is a high strength polymer
>
> *********************************************

> Ok, so it's plastic. lol

> Danny
> ***************************************
> "Secondly, the dust cap is NOT a fake
> phase plug. The shape and type of dust cap
> was selected for specific reasons. This dust
> cap was compared to several other types. It
> added some mass that was desired, and it
> gave the smoothest response than with others
> tested."
>
> *********************************************

> It's not uncommon for a driver with a dust
> cap that appears to be a 'fake phase plug'
> be
> called a fake phase plug, no big deal here.

> Danny
> ***************************************
> "Thirdly there is NO breakup node at
> 5.5kHz or energy storage problem in that
> area. In fact if you look at the cumulative
> spectral decay of all three woofers tested
> you will not only see that there is no
> energy storage problem at 5.5kHz but it is
> the cleanest in that area of all that were
> tested.

> There is also no strange suck outs at
> 1900Hz. This may have been an artifact of
> the way that they were measured (in the near
> field). If it is there when not gated but
> not there when gated then it is clearly an
> artifact of a cancellation from a late
> arriving reflection."
>
> *********************************************

> I think I missed it, where's the test data
> to support this claim ?

> Danny
> ***************************************
> <A HREF="http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm">http://www.gr-research.com/burnin.shtm</A>
> Typical observations regarding speaker burn
> in involves an opening up or relaxing of the
> presentation. Vocals will appear less
> strained or congested. The sound smooths
> out. Bass response appears cleaner, tighter,
> less distorted, and even deeper. These same
> observations are reported day in and day out
> by people all over the world and is very
> consistent.
> ********************************************

> Danny has a history of believing in 'audio
> voodoo', I've seen posts in cyber over many
> years. This is a good example of audio
> voodoo
> at work. It's BS.

> First, nobody will dispute that a driver
> specs
> can change due to it's mechanics, but to
> make
> claims that these changes always guarantees
> better
> sound is totally BS. Changing a few driver
> T/S
> parameters will not guarantee better sound.

> Danny
> ***************************************
> I really have had little interest in
> responding to this as I have not had time to
> bother with it and really didn't feel like
> enough people were paying any attention to
> this insignificant site.
> ********************************************

> ... LOL ...



(Originally posted by: Oh?)

[bryanjackson]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


I think the burden of proof rests with the person willing to spend more than 200 dollars. I know I'd sure want proof it's better if I was spending that much.

[unknownuser]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


I think the burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim. No?

> I think the burden of proof rests with the
> person willing to spend more than 200
> dollars. I know I'd sure want proof it's
> better if I was spending that much.



(Originally posted by: Oh?)

[bryanjackson]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


The burden of proof rests with the person who is making a case against a prima facie position.

[marlboro]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


Over the years, I've come to distrust the views of those who make things and sell them complaining that someone who does the consumer report thing without any specific axe to grind, is completely wrong.

John has no vested interested other that assisting the DIY community. Danny has the vested interest in selling his products. John has used Danny's products in his designs. John tests lots of different speakers with the hopes of finding the best for the best price.

Danny sells products charging what he thinks that the buyer will pay.

[spasticteapot]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


> And this is coming from a guy who thinks
> that anybody who spends over $200 on a cd
> player is wasting his money? Where's YOUR
> test data to support that B.S.?

DIYparadise "Monica" DAC with TDA1545: $125

PSU: $20

Enclosure: $25

Jacks: $10

Computer from Goodwill: $20

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


> "Danny has a history of believing in
> 'audio voodoo', I've seen posts in cyber
> over many
> years. This is a good example of audio
> voodoo
> at work. It's BS."

> And this is coming from a guy who thinks
> that anybody who spends over $200 on a cd
> player is wasting his money? Where's YOUR
> test data to support that B.S.?

Here's what Danny had to say over on Madisound.

"If you are ever in my neck of the woods drop by for a visit. My system easily allows one to hear the difference between new wire and burned in wire."

I think that's all the circumstantial evidence I need to conclude that Danny can fall for some audio voodoo.

[dennismurphy]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


>
> Danny sells products charging what he thinks
> that the buyer will pay.

And subject to competitive forces in this very competitive market. I can't fault Danny for setting what he thinks is a profit maximizing price. Any decent businessman will do that. And $25 for a very nice woofer that I've used with success in a great number of applications seems like a deal to me. Now for the rest of Danny's claims........dunno about those.

[mikewilliams]

Thanks Dennis


always trusted your opinion (always seems unbiased)

[scottanderson]

Re: Zaph versus GR Research


This is yet another example of how the DIY community forms opinions based on half truths or common held beliefs without looking at the bigger picture. Audio is one of those subjects where opinion often means more than reality when debates happen. I encourage everyone to draw his own conclusions when reading data provided by anyone other than yourself.

Nice to see a counterpoint presented.

Scott

[gibberish]

[dick]

Re: Bravo


> I
> encourage everyone to draw his own
> conclusions when reading data provided by
> anyone other than yourself.

Absolutely. It is plainly obvious that both gentlemen and their supporters are correct on some points, and full of it on others. Rather than allowing yourself to be polarized into some camp, whose demarcation line has been defined by others, listen with your ears, not your heart. The truth is complicated, and equally irrelevent.

Dick