Loudspeaker design can be as simple as basic math and all the way up into complex physics involving quantum aspects.
It covers seven branches of physics/science, and is so complex, that we don’t have any real courses or degrees in it as an applied engineered science. Ie, there is no where you can go to get a ’Bachelor of speaker design’ degree.
It is a hardcore renaissance autodidact subject, where anyone with a 2" pocket radio speaker and an old cardboard box -can play...all the way up to a player with multiple degrees in physics and engineering.
There is no accurate prediction of the level of quality or success (beyond a general take), that will show how good sounding the given resulting speakers might be, as the feedback loop of design counts on more than just smarts, it counts on the quality of human hearing function of the designer, and the listener/buyer. There is precious little recognition of human hearing as being different from person to person and not directly correlated with overall intelligence in a clear fashion. Which can lead to more confusion and bickering in the audio world.
Hearing runs the gamut of ranging, from virtual deafness to perfected and evolving high levels of skill. We build our own hearing over time and each wiring and ear set is utterly unique, and literally hears differently than the next. Same for the eye, same for the intellect. We posses basic similarity in body/mind pathways ---- but each build is unique.
It is a multi-tiered, multi-path - a set of parallel complex to navigate paths, as an overall set.
All of the sciences involved, are, at their heart or limits... incomplete, not perfected. Thus they end up meeting in inaccuracies and shots in the dark. So we can have brilliant speakers and sad hack jobs, all on the same page.
To add.... the personal level of evolution and hearing abilities/desires/wiring of the given prospective buyer can elevate mediocrity into being some sort of holy grail, or vice versa. Normal is for average, and the middle road of quality can be popularized as a holy grail and the more esoteric musing of such a grouping can still encompass mediocrity into their projections of perfection.
Commercial interests must follow these directions and motions of the potential buyers -- thus mediocrity also finds a place to flourish and expand. As we know, the biggest companies in the world of audio are almost never the best. Just the most popular. popular just means popular, and some of the negative organization we find that are pervasive in such ways... are virii, parasites, weeds, and plagues. What is commercial populism, exactly? A middle road? a bulk of similarity, a functional grouping in common communication? Can the best even be recognized or found in such an environment or is the idea of best in such a context - even relevant?
Psychology, medians & bell curves, the herd instinct in humans, and so on. Most people cannot approach the best and don’t understand it when they do, it’s appreciation being a very subjective component of unfettered personal evolution, just like it is in all other ares of inclusive complex human evolution. Quality does not necessarily cost, but it can and many times does.
The subject area is so complex and inclusive that all voices have room to be of themselves and move in many a way and direction.
It covers seven branches of physics/science, and is so complex, that we don’t have any real courses or degrees in it as an applied engineered science. Ie, there is no where you can go to get a ’Bachelor of speaker design’ degree.
It is a hardcore renaissance autodidact subject, where anyone with a 2" pocket radio speaker and an old cardboard box -can play...all the way up to a player with multiple degrees in physics and engineering.
There is no accurate prediction of the level of quality or success (beyond a general take), that will show how good sounding the given resulting speakers might be, as the feedback loop of design counts on more than just smarts, it counts on the quality of human hearing function of the designer, and the listener/buyer. There is precious little recognition of human hearing as being different from person to person and not directly correlated with overall intelligence in a clear fashion. Which can lead to more confusion and bickering in the audio world.
Hearing runs the gamut of ranging, from virtual deafness to perfected and evolving high levels of skill. We build our own hearing over time and each wiring and ear set is utterly unique, and literally hears differently than the next. Same for the eye, same for the intellect. We posses basic similarity in body/mind pathways ---- but each build is unique.
It is a multi-tiered, multi-path - a set of parallel complex to navigate paths, as an overall set.
All of the sciences involved, are, at their heart or limits... incomplete, not perfected. Thus they end up meeting in inaccuracies and shots in the dark. So we can have brilliant speakers and sad hack jobs, all on the same page.
To add.... the personal level of evolution and hearing abilities/desires/wiring of the given prospective buyer can elevate mediocrity into being some sort of holy grail, or vice versa. Normal is for average, and the middle road of quality can be popularized as a holy grail and the more esoteric musing of such a grouping can still encompass mediocrity into their projections of perfection.
Commercial interests must follow these directions and motions of the potential buyers -- thus mediocrity also finds a place to flourish and expand. As we know, the biggest companies in the world of audio are almost never the best. Just the most popular. popular just means popular, and some of the negative organization we find that are pervasive in such ways... are virii, parasites, weeds, and plagues. What is commercial populism, exactly? A middle road? a bulk of similarity, a functional grouping in common communication? Can the best even be recognized or found in such an environment or is the idea of best in such a context - even relevant?
Psychology, medians & bell curves, the herd instinct in humans, and so on. Most people cannot approach the best and don’t understand it when they do, it’s appreciation being a very subjective component of unfettered personal evolution, just like it is in all other ares of inclusive complex human evolution. Quality does not necessarily cost, but it can and many times does.
The subject area is so complex and inclusive that all voices have room to be of themselves and move in many a way and direction.