Are advances in technology making speakers better?

And now I'm being told to upgrade

Who's telling you to upgrade?  Is there a deficiency  that needs to be addressed?  Is an upgraded speaker the only way to overcome that deficiency?  If that's the case then you'll need to upgrade.  If it's not the case newer isn't always better. (it sometimes even true if that is the case)

hmmm ... history AR-2 Rectilinear III ADS 730 Joseph RM25XL Joseph Perspective2 at every step, noticeable difference (I think I'm done and quite happy with the latest) and then there are Magnepan LRS in the basement and waiting for LRS+ but that's a whole other way of approaching one's music

@larryi

I think we are just emphasizing different perspectives. Mine mostly comes from observation of the sound achieved across the spectrum of speakers that have been on the market over that time. Granted I did build some enormous speakers in the 1970’s based on ideal infinite baffle design, I was young and stupid… so it really doesn’t count.

I agree, of all the different components in audio, they are the easiest for someone with a saw and a concept to manufacture, with far less education. They evaluate and buy parts, crossovers, do some woodworking, and put them on the market. No question… the proof is in the market place… more speakers than any other component. But the available components have improved enormously… and a number of companies make they own drivers.

Maybe it comes down to price category as well… in the < $5K range it would have been easy to make the same sound decades ago… in a larger box size.

On the other hand, the electronic designers are crafting their sound as well… so to in MBL, Audio Research, B&W, and Boulder… with their choice of caps and resisters as well as design determine the sound. If I was to pull a speaker to be an example it would be Magico. They have pushed the envelop in enclosures… probably other aspects as well.

I did not bring up Amati as an example of a speaker that leads using cutting edge technology, although compared with 30 or 40 years ago, sure it is. I only brought it up for the “paper cone” point.

I get your point. But, what I hear is so much better… decade by decade. I just can’t attribute it to fashion.

 

 

@cd318

You are too kind!

I wish I knew as much about speaker design as most of you here do, but I am a pretty "thick" when it comes to hardware. It interests me but it is also too elusive, these are just pretty boxes to me.

I am so hands-on, I can’t learn from books. It only sticks with me if I get to peak inside and hear the difference. Your perspective on education is very true and also depressing.

Half or us are below average :)

I personally tend to focus on development of high efficiency designs because I prefer the sound of low-powered amps, particularly certain tube amps.  In that realm, there have certainly been some recent developments/refinement of drivers that I would consider major improvements.  I like what is being done with full/wide range drivers, like the 8” AER BD series, Voxativ drivers, etc.  Although the basic technology is not new, I am sure that modern technology played a big role in refining the design.  In recent years I have heard several very good systems employing such drivers (e.g. Charney single driver systems, Voxativ single and multiway systems, Songer single and multiway systems).

At the Capital Audiofest, I heard Andrew Jones talking about his design of the Mo-Fi speaker that is getting very favorable notice (I think it is very good for the money).  While the basic design of the co-axial drivers is old school—paper cones, pleated surround, silk dome tweeter—the way it was designed employed modern technology, such as using 3D printing of prototype parts.  It would have been pretty hard to get to the low price point of these speakers without modern design tools.