Earl Geddes on audio

[abhijitnath]

I've been thinking hard after Bhagwan's thread the other day, on how we approach audio and think about it. Each of us is different, and it doesn't really matter, as long as it gives us pleasure.
However, it is important to acknowledge what the state of the art is scientifically, at least at the moment. I ran into this article recently and found it extremely illumniating- An Interview with Dr. Earl Geddes of GedLee LLC | Dagogo | A Unique Audiophile Experience. I'm a big proponent of constant/controlled directivity, so this fits in with what I like to hear, in any case.
Do have a look- views would be great!

 

[denom]

Continuing in the same vein, found another link on FB that continues the heated discussion with regard to 'stuff'
Involves Ethan Winer, Thorsten Loesch & indirectly Earl Geddes

FB Link
https://www.facebook.com/groups/audiophile.community/permalink/525173204202762/

 

[arj]

I've been thinking hard after Bhagwan's thread the other day, on how we approach audio and think about it. Each of us is different, and it doesn't really matter, as long as it gives us pleasure.
However, it is important to acknowledge what the state of the art is scientifically, at least at the moment. I ran into this article recently and found it extremely illumniating- An Interview with Dr. Earl Geddes of GedLee LLC | Dagogo | A Unique Audiophile Experience. I'm a big proponent of constant/controlled directivity, so this fits in with what I like to hear, in any case.
Do have a look- views would be great!

thanks for the link..he is another guy pushing around set boundaries and new designs.
prem had given me his name when i had begun exploring speakers..and i wanted high efficiency full rangers but was scared of trying something new and unheard.
He seems to be one of those who really know what to measure and then translate that into engineering the product.

 

[Rajiv]

Hi,

Thanks for the link.

LB: What are your current thoughts on high-end audio, and where do you see it headed in the next 10 years?

EG: Elite high-end will always be there, but it will get increasingly smaller and as a result increasingly more expensive. It is inevitable that people will get educated in what matters in audio and see that there is no relationship in the high-end between what matters and the prices. As fewer and fewer people buy-into the high-end dogma the margins will have to go up to sustain the ever shrinking market. We see this now. The future, I believe, will belong to value. The number of people who appreciate good sound will remain relatively constant, but as fewer and fewer of them can afford the elite products, they will become more and more value-oriented. It is much more satisfying to listen to a really good system that didnt cost more than your house than it is to brag about how much you spent on something that isnt really any better than your neighbors. My systems are not all that expensive and yet I would put them up against anything out there today at any price level. I consider myself to be the value leader in loudspeaker and audio design today. This has been my goal not gouging the consumer with snake-oil techniques.

Regards
Rajiv

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Ethan Winer said (in 2005, so allow for inflation)...

As an audio pro, I know that $1,000 can buy a state of the art power amplifier. So it makes no sense to pay, say, $17,000 for an amplifier that is no better and may well be worse.

But... I am not even any sort of hard-core "audiophile" yet I know how hard it is to be persuaded away from dreaming of the beautiful cases, the almost-holy names, the high price tags. It is also tough, perhaps even the toughest thing of all, to admit that I might have been wrong about their amazing desirability in the first place

Oddly, on of my first posts on this forum was of the "you get what you pay for" kind, and several members disagreed (at least that that was universally true) at the time.

(catching up with the link in the opening post. Ethan Winer was one of the first to open my eyes to some realities)

EDIT: The Earl Geddes interview is brilliant, but I could not take it in in one sitting, so the last 1/3rd is bookmarked for another day.

 

[kanwar]

Nice Article

It once again proves that how deceptively the people who have zero understanding of concrete scientific approach or are lacking indepth knowledge towards their field of work[designing audio equimpment in this case] can make mockery of basic science and flocks of audiophools following such morons are endless.


Whereas knowledgeable people like Dr. Earl Geddes still find it hard to convince the so called audiophiles about the vital effects of realm of Psychoacoustics which can play with their brains.

 

[arj]

Heres a thread by him on Crossover distortion on DIY audio
Geddes on distortion measurements - diyAudio

 

[viren bakhshi]

As reproduced music is "perceived" by the individual in a listening environment, things are not quite cut-and-tried, as the measurement guys make it out to be.

Earl Geddes has done very good work in speaker design, including theoretical research, is very dogmatic about his findings - but, he is just one voice in the vast arena of music perception. As followers of the extended thread in diyAudio "Beyond The Ariel" will have found, Earl has butted heads with many experienced designers - his is not the only truth.

Kanwar: "It once again proves that how deceptively the people who have zero understanding of concrete scientific approach or are lacking indepth knowledge towards their field of work[designing audio equimpment in this case] can make mockery of basic science and flocks of audiophools following such morons are endless.

Sorry, but that itself is sort of a moronic statement. You have to have an open mind if you are willing to learn from other peoples' work.

Viren

 

[kanwar]

Sorry, but that itself is sort of a moronic statement. You have to have an open mind if you are willing to learn from other peoples' work.

Viren

I don't know time and again you are getting offended without any reason[What made you to deliver this personal attack, better clarify it in PM please]. I have an open mind set only, otherwise with a close mind set, people are looped into dogmatic approach and they never think out of the box which can solve problems in unique way. I didn't knew that you could harbor such kind of skewed mindset against someone like this. Learning is never ending process, if any one is willing to learn and learning always needs an open mindset and i don't need any advice from anyone in that case, in which i always strive to have -> an open mind set.

Sorry to say, but this kind of behavior doesn't suits you.




PS: Dr. Earl Geddes has done good work in psychoacoustics. There is wealth of information in his research papers as well. Do you think anyone with a closed mind set would be able to learn from it ?. The things you are saying about Dr. Earl Geddes

he is just one voice in the vast arena of music perception. As followers of the extended thread in diyAudio "Beyond The Ariel" will have found, Earl has butted heads with many experienced designers - his is not the only truth.

Does that mean that one should not learn anything from his experience and the work he has done?, I really don't think so. I always learn good things from a person and ignore bad things in him, is that a moronic thing to do Mr. Viren ?




Kanwar

 

[viren bakhshi]

Kanwar,

There was no intention of a "personal attack". I took your comment in a general way, and replied in a similar vein.

Beyond that, I have nothing more to say.

Regards,
Viren

 

[GeorgeO]

I have to agree with Viren.

I have seen Earl's contributions on the basslist over a decade ago, and even exchanged emails with him. Like many brilliant people, he has his views and holds on to them strongly. No doubt his products have their followers( in fact I almost bought a pair of his waveguides-the Nathans I believe, not the Abbeys when they were offered as kits at an introductory price, some years ago), but bringing the enclosures across was a bit daunting. By all accounts they perform very well.

His credentials are impressive and so is his work, but, hey, different strokes for different folks!

 

[denom]

And I have to agree with Kanwar.

Unless & until we do not think out of the box, look for solutions rather than give excuses - then & only then can we unearth answers & improve not only our knowledge but also our way of doing things & implementing them in the product.

Otherwise we have excuses given in the name of hiding certain defects which could be sorted but only if 1 is not dogged & stubborn to hold onto beliefs & be open to learn & thereby set things right.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

As reproduced music is "perceived" by the individual in a listening environment, things are not quite cut-and-tried, as the measurement guys make it out to be.

Did you read the linked-to article, Viren? It seems that perception is one of the biggest aspect of his work, and his partner/wife's speciality is psychoacoustics. He also speaks, over and over, of measurements which are deficient and don't say anything useful at all and how useless they are.

You may not like his products; you may not agree with his theories, but it would be nice, if you are going to respond to what he says, if you respond to what he actually says. Putting other view points will move the conversation on.

 

[GeorgeO]

I meant w.r.t to his statement about Earl's rather dogmatic attitude. Many brilliant people are not good at suffering what they see as "fools"..

 

[viren bakhshi]

Thad,

Ah, a somewhat hasty conclusion. I've been following Earl Geddes' work for a long time, have read some of his technical papers, and read an extract of his book "Audio Transducers". But most of all have been the illuminating conversations between Earl and other designers on the diyAudio thread "Beyond the Ariel". Rather voluminious, if you can find the time to go through it.

Perceptual goalposts are rather fluid - what one considers primary may be of lesser importance to another. Somehow, after all his meticulous research, Earl's theories have not played out too well in practice. Others disagree with his conclusions, or the importance of the parameters that he measures. Earl himself states "I am not saying that measurements are infallible, and I dont believe that measurements are likely to ever be 100% reliable, but that does not mean that we cannot obtain measurements that are far better than the unstable subjective opinions that are so often relied upon. One has to know what measures are important and to what degree of resolution we need to know the results to be meaningful." There's a lot of contention regarding his measurements and conclusions.

One example is his work showing distortion in horns, the importance of HOMs (higher order modes), and how his waveguides produce the lowest distortion of all. Jean-Michel LeCleach has contested that, and has shown, also through measurements, that his LeCleach horn produces a much smoother response, with lower distortions.

I give the man his due. All I am saying is that there is a lot more to music perception that can't be reduced to measurements.

Regards,
Viren

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Well, that is a much fuller answer. I guess I'd have to read the book, and to be honest, I soon come up against being a mathematical illiterate when it comes to such things, though, over and over, I try.

I imagine that he is using words very carefuly. To me, "perception," involves a boundary between the perceiver and the perceived. phenomenon can be measured, a person's internal response to it [maybe] can not. If one was to attempt to measure the effect of the concert that I went to yesterday evening, it would have to include how well I slept and how I felt when I woke up this morning!

 

[captrajesh]

phenomenon can be measured, a person's internal response to it [maybe] can not.

If you meant how he is perceiving the stimuli (music in this case) I guess it can surely be measured as well using techniques of brain mapping.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Well, yes... If one wanted to go that far!

In another conversation, I mentioned that assessment of the effects of the concert I went to last night would have to include the excellent night's sleep that followed it and waking up feeling free of stress. Maybe that would even come under the heading of useful measurements :lol:

 

[arj]

thad..you are slipping and getting "scarily" subjective hyeah:

 

[abhijitnath]

Well, yes... If one wanted to go that far!

In another conversation, I mentioned that assessment of the effects of the concert I went to last night would have to include the excellent night's sleep that followed it and waking up feeling free of stress. Maybe that would even come under the heading of useful measurements :lol:

What concert did you go for?