I speak for myself when I say I'd like to see more of the company. I also would like to see more of your products. I have a feeling a lot more viewers feel the same way.
In the past, until 1950, in the old time of tube radios and tube amps, there was the gold time of speaker field coils. There was no strong enough permanent magnets available. In these times, the field coil played two different roles: 1- produced the magnetic field for the speaker; 2 - worked as a low pass filter for the power supply for the tubes, as an inductor, reducing hum and voltage fluctuations. Usualy these second function was named "chocke". After the tube/valve (or sellenium) rectifier, there was a "pi" filter consisting of a capacitor across + and -, the "chocke" in series and a second capacitor between + and - again, figuring the shape of the "pi" greek letter. Regards.
Field coil magnets are 100% better than permanent. No question, full stop. The only reason they are not more common today is because of COST. Companies like PS Audio makes things to a cost, and they (and others) will cut costs when and where possible. When you add an ‘amplifier’ for the field coil, and the cost of winding the copper, it’s considerably more expensive. But don’t kid yourself: the FC drivers are fantastic and so much better (less distortion, more effortless, tunable).
Well said. The magnet determines the sound. I use alnico magnet drivers and to my ear they have a more natural sound than typical drivers. My understanding is this character is far more apparent in a well made field coil driver. Less compression and therefore more natural and effortless sounding. If I were to change drivers it would be to a top of the line field coil system but as you point out, price will be substantial.
@@paulb4661 I think the 100% means they are without a doubt better. How much that means is highly subjective. To me, natural, dynamic and real is the deal so there is no competition between speakers that deliver that and ones that do not. I have heard this in conventional driver in a box setup, but they are usually 6 figure expensive. I also hear it in my $3k alnico diy open baffles which makes me very happy. Mega dollar horns from Aries Cerat have it in spades.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w Fancy relic from the long gone days of adequate BL being beyond reach of permanent magnets and a bit of usual marketing nonsense, but then again, I do not listen to magnets.
Explanation in just a few words. Instead of a permanent magnet, field coil drivers use electromagnets. Electromagnets were used in very early speaker drivers before adequate permanent magnets were available. It beats me why Paul seems never to be able to provide a succinct description of something.
I think a stator coil operating in concert with a PM could present opportunities such as negating the downsides of NFB, using NFB differently to counter suspension borne compression as well as cabinet modes. The math would probably be above my pay grade.
Years ago, electrolytic capacitors were huge and the coil helped filter the power. We never had more than a few watts of audio power so heating never occurred.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w The coil that energized the speaker's electromagnet was used as a choke, placed in series with the rectified DC input to the High Voltage supply, the inductance forming an LC filter reducing the ripple voltage.
Amplifiers have negative feedback circuits to achieve linearity and lower distortion down to a tiny fraction of a percent. A speaker is on the other hand highly un-linear due to how the electromagnetic field operates and how the spider and surround behaves at different positions causing vastly more distortion than the electronics. In addition you have cone breakup, intermodulation distortion, thermal dependency etc. For these and other reasons, we can all agree that the choice of a speaker is the most important decision for creating a good system. But when will someone innovate a super precise cone position feedback component that can be used to make an audiophile servo speaker (not just subwoofer)? For example, the head of a hard disk can read 2 million bits over an inch. It's gotta be possible today to enable some super tight precise cone control at also higher frequencies, but it's like there is zero innovation in speaker drivers for many years already. I often find myself discovering details using my HiFiMan Susvara planar or Stax electrostatic headphones that seem to lack with dynamic headphones or a stereo speaker setup and my theory is that it has to do with the limits of dynamic drivers.
Hi.The unfortunate aspect of inevitable cone break up is that it's an independent force of the motor and suspension. The analogy of dropping a stone into water is a good analogy.Once the force gas been applied,at higher frequencies the driver will always break up.Either controlling that utilising careful profiling and edge termination, or simply filtering out the worst aspect of that behaviour with a crossover are the only real world options. As you rightly say,the suspension too has it's non linearity and the box alignment will also contribute towards that. Speakers are a long way behind electronics in terms of their evolution with applications being little more than refinements on what's been done before.
@@oliverbeard7912 Yes, I didn't mean to say that high-speed feedback on a dynamic speaker driver can make it perfect. Cone breakup is better solved by the cone material and design choices. There is probably a moment of using machine learning in optimizing some signal processing against getting sound pressure to follow signal intent as closely as possible. It seems nothing much has happened for many decades in dynamic speaker driver design. In my teens in the 1980s I bought a pair of JBL 18ti speakers using polypropylene woofer domes and titanium tweeters having a breakup avoiding diamond pattern design hitting up to 27kHz -6dB. Clearly creative effort was used at that time in improving dynamic drivers and this speaker delivered 55Hz-20kHz ±3dB and Stereophile claimed it was the most neutral JBL speaker at that time. It still works in my gym room 40 years later (new caps). It seems to me that the creative side of driver development has been lost with the supply chain moving overseas (mostly China).
@@ThinkingBetter Yes,it's all rather stagnant and marketing lead. Some brands have made concerted efforts to push driver resonances as far out of band as possible, others have taken steps to try and better handle flux and suspension non linearites. I'm very much in favour of those who have paid alot of attention to transient response and time domain behaviour. There are many designs that measure well with respect to frequency response, but they all sound vastly different even so,given the other aspects involved,transient response behaviour (elastic hysteresis) being just one of those.
Do different types of magnets (if & when with exactly the same power and geometry - magnetic circuit included) make a speaker sound different ? same for its basket material such as aluminum vs steel vs …) ? I ask this as some audiophiles do say that old speakers with alnico magnet and stamped steel basket sounded better than the same model when equipped with ferrite magnet and aluminum basket
Yes. Two separate impacts. Stamped steel vs cast AL impacts ringing of the structure. Alnico vs ferrous magnets impact how linear the magnet it and the resulting distortion. Most will argue that field coil magnets produce the most dynamic natural sound followed by alnico and then the cheaper ferrous magnet. While alnico does sound good they are limited in their strength. Field coils can be an order of magnitude stronger.
I posted a couple of comments on their last video,which contained nothing that was unduly negative,or controversial, but they deleted mine along with those of the guy I was messaging too. Not the end of the world,but a pretty poor show,I felt.
They probably sound good, but from their videos I get a feeling of self-righteousness. Also think their business model (like AN’s which they follow) of dozens of different tier levels is confusing and damaging.
@@volpedo2000 What you say about 'confusing and damaging' I found exactly that when dealing with MCRU, I was cooked afterwards but received an amazing LPS.
You need a bunch of money and a side load RAYMOND fork lift. Extendable forks, side shift . I worked at a Lowes (worst 2 years). They had all overstock on ceiling high racks. Everything you needed all the time was UP THERE. Couldn't read stock # from the ground - had to climb rolling ladders a 100 times a day and try and carry heavy fans and fixtures down with one hand. OH - you have more than half a brain and care about your employees and inventory. Love the daily visits and stories. Take care
Well...Yes, and no! When I was in the Navy, many years ago, at the then West Coast Service Electronics School, on Treasure Island, San Francisco, I met Bob Andrews, who had a small record shop, with a large area in the back, to assemble: extension speakers for juke boxes, beginning during World War Two! And Bob told me that his speakers did not use magnets. OR a transformer with AC Power. Instead, there was an additional box, with a transformer, for the correct volage, and, a rectifier, I believe, to convert the AC Power, to: DC! And, isn't his what a magnet is? An electromagnetic, electrostatic field, in one direction, potential, which never changes? And: this will not heat up, as there is less current flow, as, once again, no AC field is being produced, only the constant DC potential! Worked well! 😀😁
Huh? I think you all need to go back to the drawing board on this video and spend a little more time investigating the field coil speaker. The only reason it is not the standard is that it is expensive to produce. Most of the negatives haven't been an issue since the late 70s.
Field coils are terribly inefficient. In old radios they usually served two purposes, in that they were also a choke for the power supply. Today they make little, if any, sense. Avoid!
Just like any other architecture, each can be optimized. Optimum neodymium, AlNiCo or even ferrite magnets can produce the same acoustic result. What you can not do is just change the magnet from one to another leaving everything else the same. I think that more expensive solutions are for those that define their success with the price tag.
I speak for myself when I say I'd like to see more of the company. I also would like to see more of your products. I have a feeling a lot more viewers feel the same way.
Your onto something Paul!!! Excellent idea, a small, medium, and large room for recording. Give you the whole spectrum of natural reverb.
Warehouse optimisation is a speciality and a valid field of expertise.
In the past, until 1950, in the old time of tube radios and tube amps, there was the gold time of speaker field coils. There was no strong enough permanent magnets available.
In these times, the field coil played two different roles: 1- produced the magnetic field for the speaker; 2 - worked as a low pass filter for the power supply for the tubes, as an inductor, reducing hum and voltage fluctuations. Usualy these second function was named "chocke". After the tube/valve (or sellenium) rectifier, there was a "pi" filter consisting of a capacitor across + and -, the "chocke" in series and a second capacitor between + and - again, figuring the shape of the "pi" greek letter.
Regards.
Field coil magnets are 100% better than permanent. No question, full stop. The only reason they are not more common today is because of COST. Companies like PS Audio makes things to a cost, and they (and others) will cut costs when and where possible. When you add an ‘amplifier’ for the field coil, and the cost of winding the copper, it’s considerably more expensive. But don’t kid yourself: the FC drivers are fantastic and so much better (less distortion, more effortless, tunable).
Well said. The magnet determines the sound. I use alnico magnet drivers and to my ear they have a more natural sound than typical drivers. My understanding is this character is far more apparent in a well made field coil driver. Less compression and therefore more natural and effortless sounding.
If I were to change drivers it would be to a top of the line field coil system but as you point out, price will be substantial.
Better how? 100% means twice as good, or waht exactly?
@@paulb4661 I think the 100% means they are without a doubt better.
How much that means is highly subjective. To me, natural, dynamic and real is the deal so there is no competition between speakers that deliver that and ones that do not. I have heard this in conventional driver in a box setup, but they are usually 6 figure expensive. I also hear it in my $3k alnico diy open baffles which makes me very happy. Mega dollar horns from Aries Cerat have it in spades.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w Fancy relic from the past, when adequate gap field strength was beyond reach of permanent magnets.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w Fancy relic from the long gone days of adequate BL being beyond reach of permanent magnets and a bit of usual marketing nonsense, but then again, I do not listen to magnets.
Hey Paul, I thought it was a terrific explanation. Cheers....
Explanation in just a few words. Instead of a permanent magnet, field coil drivers use electromagnets. Electromagnets were used in very early speaker drivers before adequate permanent magnets were available. It beats me why Paul seems never to be able to provide a succinct description of something.
That’s interesting. I was told that electromagnetic speakers were common in the very early days of radio.
From the looks of that empty warehouse, your Black Friday blowout was a success. 🙂
I think a stator coil operating in concert with a PM could present opportunities such as negating the downsides of NFB, using NFB differently to counter suspension borne compression as well as cabinet modes. The math would probably be above my pay grade.
Years ago, electrolytic capacitors were huge and the coil helped filter the power. We never had more than a few watts of audio power so heating never occurred.
Yes it was two in one. It is justified to use them in tube amps.
Are you referring to a choke?
@@user-od9iz9cv1w the field coil of the speaker was used as a very effective choke. They also had a hum bucking winding
Saved money and power but introduced new problems, however wonderful the drivers may be, the results were compromised.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w The coil that energized the speaker's electromagnet was used as a choke, placed in series with the rectified DC input to the High Voltage supply, the inductance forming an LC filter reducing the ripple voltage.
I could easily drive a forklift in that space👀 Looks like twice the size I was used to at some job. There are small forklifts exactly for this purpose
Field coils do not create a lot of heat. depending on the design, you’re talking about ~30C. The voice coil gets hotter.
Amplifiers have negative feedback circuits to achieve linearity and lower distortion down to a tiny fraction of a percent. A speaker is on the other hand highly un-linear due to how the electromagnetic field operates and how the spider and surround behaves at different positions causing vastly more distortion than the electronics. In addition you have cone breakup, intermodulation distortion, thermal dependency etc. For these and other reasons, we can all agree that the choice of a speaker is the most important decision for creating a good system. But when will someone innovate a super precise cone position feedback component that can be used to make an audiophile servo speaker (not just subwoofer)? For example, the head of a hard disk can read 2 million bits over an inch. It's gotta be possible today to enable some super tight precise cone control at also higher frequencies, but it's like there is zero innovation in speaker drivers for many years already. I often find myself discovering details using my HiFiMan Susvara planar or Stax electrostatic headphones that seem to lack with dynamic headphones or a stereo speaker setup and my theory is that it has to do with the limits of dynamic drivers.
Hi.The unfortunate aspect of inevitable cone break up is that it's an independent force of the motor and suspension. The analogy of dropping a stone into water is a good analogy.Once the force gas been applied,at higher frequencies the driver will always break up.Either controlling that utilising careful profiling and edge termination, or simply filtering out the worst aspect of that behaviour with a crossover are the only real world options. As you rightly say,the suspension too has it's non linearity and the box alignment will also contribute towards that. Speakers are a long way behind electronics in terms of their evolution with applications being little more than refinements on what's been done before.
@@oliverbeard7912 Yes, I didn't mean to say that high-speed feedback on a dynamic speaker driver can make it perfect. Cone breakup is better solved by the cone material and design choices. There is probably a moment of using machine learning in optimizing some signal processing against getting sound pressure to follow signal intent as closely as possible. It seems nothing much has happened for many decades in dynamic speaker driver design. In my teens in the 1980s I bought a pair of JBL 18ti speakers using polypropylene woofer domes and titanium tweeters having a breakup avoiding diamond pattern design hitting up to 27kHz -6dB. Clearly creative effort was used at that time in improving dynamic drivers and this speaker delivered 55Hz-20kHz ±3dB and Stereophile claimed it was the most neutral JBL speaker at that time. It still works in my gym room 40 years later (new caps). It seems to me that the creative side of driver development has been lost with the supply chain moving overseas (mostly China).
@@ThinkingBetter Yes,it's all rather stagnant and marketing lead. Some brands have made concerted efforts to push driver resonances as far out of band as possible, others have taken steps to try and better handle flux and suspension non linearites. I'm very much in favour of those who have paid alot of attention to transient response and time domain behaviour. There are many designs that measure well with respect to frequency response, but they all sound vastly different even so,given the other aspects involved,transient response behaviour (elastic hysteresis) being just one of those.
Do different types of magnets (if & when with exactly the same power and geometry - magnetic circuit included) make a speaker sound different ? same for its basket material such as aluminum vs steel vs …) ?
I ask this as some audiophiles do say that old speakers with alnico magnet and stamped steel basket sounded better than the same model when equipped with ferrite magnet and aluminum basket
Of course they do. The magnet is in the signal path! That’s why FC are superior to permanent magnets.
Yes. Two separate impacts.
Stamped steel vs cast AL impacts ringing of the structure.
Alnico vs ferrous magnets impact how linear the magnet it and the resulting distortion.
Most will argue that field coil magnets produce the most dynamic natural sound followed by alnico and then the cheaper ferrous magnet. While alnico does sound good they are limited in their strength. Field coils can be an order of magnitude stronger.
SW1X Audio Design are literally in this field, with nice tube rectified PS's. I think will be stunning to listen to as well.
I posted a couple of comments on their last video,which contained nothing that was unduly negative,or controversial, but they deleted mine along with those of the guy I was messaging too. Not the end of the world,but a pretty poor show,I felt.
They probably sound good, but from their videos I get a feeling of self-righteousness. Also think their business model (like AN’s which they follow) of dozens of different tier levels is confusing and damaging.
@@oliverbeard7912 You have no control - The internet.
@@volpedo2000 What you say about 'confusing and damaging' I found exactly that when dealing with MCRU, I was cooked afterwards but received an amazing LPS.
James Clark Maxwell has a lot to answer for.
Could use power to refrigerate the permanent magnets instead. ;)
You need a bunch of money and a side load RAYMOND fork lift. Extendable forks, side shift . I worked at a Lowes (worst 2 years). They had all overstock on ceiling high racks. Everything you needed all the time was UP THERE. Couldn't read stock # from the ground - had to climb rolling ladders a 100 times a day and try and carry heavy fans and fixtures down with one hand. OH - you have more than half a brain and care about your employees and inventory. Love the daily visits and stories. Take care
Well...Yes, and no! When I was in the Navy, many years ago, at the then West Coast Service Electronics School, on Treasure Island, San Francisco, I met Bob Andrews, who had a small record shop, with a large area in the back, to assemble: extension speakers for juke boxes, beginning during World War Two! And Bob told me that his speakers did not use magnets. OR a transformer with AC Power. Instead, there was an additional box, with a transformer, for the correct volage, and, a rectifier, I believe, to convert the AC Power, to: DC! And, isn't his what a magnet is? An electromagnetic, electrostatic field, in one direction, potential, which never changes? And: this will not heat up, as there is less current flow, as, once again, no AC field is being produced, only the constant DC potential! Worked well! 😀😁
They added a few light years/per gigawatts on the last Alien ship I rode on, frankly the performance makes me nauseous.
I made a big coil the morning after Thanksgiving
Huh? I think you all need to go back to the drawing board on this video and spend a little more time investigating the field coil speaker. The only reason it is not the standard is that it is expensive to produce. Most of the negatives haven't been an issue since the late 70s.
The Buda Pest
These are in fact two parts of the city - Buda and Pest (pronounced like pesht). 😉
Field coils are terribly inefficient.
In old radios they usually served two purposes, in that they were also a choke for the power supply.
Today they make little, if any, sense.
Avoid!
Just like any other architecture, each can be optimized. Optimum neodymium, AlNiCo or even ferrite magnets can produce the same acoustic result. What you can not do is just change the magnet from one to another leaving everything else the same. I think that more expensive solutions are for those that define their success with the price tag.
No permanent magnet can produce the same magnetic force as a FC.