Gotta hand it to JD -- this is the best interview with AJ I've heard. Mainly because JD asked a few key questions and then let AJ have the time to respond without interruption.
Always love to hear the intellectual and informed ideas and thought processes of such experts. Really gives clarity over the noise we hear from less informed and stubborn opinions from every corner of the internet.
I own the elacs ub5’s the image is holographic & I’ve been listening to magnepans since the 80’s. Dave matthews Tim Reynolds’s live at radio city 1077, I can see both guitars Dave’s voice & each guitar has a completely different sound, solid center image. Andrew Jones is a great speaker designer
This is SO true. The reality is - even from the artist’s vision - there is no fixed reality. Music is the art of the ephemeral. Nothing is fixed or permanent. From live performance, to recording and mixing and mastering, to speaker design, DAC implementation, headphone tunings, to EQ, to DSP, to different people with different hearing capabilities: we are living with live sound in live spaces and different situations…music is approximations, and close estimations. In this sense, we ought to embrace the differences rather than hold to music as fixed. Hence, there is no such thing as purity and we should enjoy the innovations and ambiguities of the auditory world and the meanings we can construe from them.
I love that he mentions that there is no "true to the original sound". There is no absolute truth. Go to a dozen recording studios, and you'll hear a dozen very different sounding monitor systems!
Excellent interview John, thank you. Mr. Jones is a very interesting engineer and obviously loves what he does very much. His enthusiasm can be felt throughout the interview. My favorite piece of the interview was at around 38:00, when Mr. Jones said that a "speaker should to be independent to the type of music" - couldn't agree more :)
The concept of multi-microphone recording, like with the double-bass, is to have the possibility in the mixing process to be able to have all the advantageous parts of each microphone position and it’s corresponding frequency response/control of the recorded instrument and then to pick‘n‘mix those signals to (re)create a version, or even a very different creative version of the said instrument, in the example of the double bass, if present, the pick-up signal for very dry,controlled and transient rich signal, the close, or even in the f-hole for a harmonically rich but pure, so therefore very controllable in the fundamental „acoustic“ version of the sound, a microphone at say one meter to pick-up the „playing“ of the instrument with a „softer“ transient response, and, if required for the piece of music a distant microphone, or even a binaural one, to recreate the „ambience“ of the room or the perceived position of the listener, what is criticality is the time and phase alignment of all pickups/microphones after assembling the part(s) of each signal that you have chosen to assemble a realistic single instrument out of an artificial source, ie two or more loudspeakers. I must say as a professional sound engineer I do sometimes have a little chuckle to myself about some comments from audiophiles about the „purity“ of some recordings….and I think to myself, oh my, if only they knew…..“. There is a massive amount of signal manipulation goes on in between the instrument and whatever, the simplest and most direct way of taking moving air, turning it into moving electrons and back to moving air from an artificial source just purely because of its nature Alters the signal massively, even the (in)famous „direct to disc“ still have to go through mic/pre-amp/RIAA curve eq/cutting head driver amp……and let’s not even start with RIAA curves, extreme sad then smiley face eq‘s and an extremely hard single pole piece tracking a a v shaped cut in relatively soft plastic apparently doesn’t change the signal. Back in the days of am radio when mixing a song we made a 7“ mono mix, 7“ stereo mix, 12“ album cut mix, and if the time and money was there a 12“ 45 rpm mix, why might you ask? Well every Format had different limitations of dynamics and frequency response so….and people wonder why master tape to cd‘s sounded so awful…..yup, pure hi-fi……😂
Wow - this is, I think, the best interview about speaker design and about audio - that I have ever heard! Andrew Jones is articulate and lucid and plain-spoken - and I have gained a much better understanding of our hobby/love is about.
Wow! A masterclass of an interview. Anyone who works with scientists or engineers on a daily basis will appreciate how much patience he’s exercising here, to explain things coherently and simply.
They are "blocky". An intentional attempt to mimick some of the design features of '70's speakers. But we understand that it won't be to everyone's taste. That's OK 😁
Perhaps loudspeakers should be sold with room included. That way the designer will know what it's going to sound like in that room. Or a line of tiny homes designed by Andrew Jones might be tempting to someone.
His point is: there is not one way to make a good loudspeaker and the perfekt sound does only exist in your mind. Being able to live with a compromise is always the only way to a happy life and also to a satisfying listening experience...
'True-to-source' means getting the input signal out the speakers with as few non-linearities as possible. And since we weren't there at the recording studio the best we can do is use measurements where we know the input signal exactly. All that is left is pinpointing how the speaker's anechoic / Klippel measurements differ from the input signal and address it. AJ knows this of course and that's why he was confident enough showing the proto without even listening (as mentioned in the interview).
Had the pleasure of meeting and chatting with Mr. Jones in Tampa earlier this year at the Florida Audio show. What a generous and gentle soul he is. John, I was SO hoping that you would ask him for examples of the music he uses as he voices his speakers. Regardless, he's a superstar and thanks for your interview.
I would love to see a comparison between the Zu DWX in superfly upgrade vs. the Mofi SourcePoint 8 (and SourcePoint 10 if possible). I have a pair of dirty weekend from a few years ago that I love, but I am getting that new speaker itch and I am interested in seeing the Mofi speakers but have love for Zu’s sound.
They both sound fantastic (albeit, I’ve only heard the similar mofo source point 10’s and zu union 6’s). Would be a difficult choice to make. Yea, a side-by-side would be fun.
Excellent interview! Couple of things I hope he would have touched upon more: a) as the midrange driver moves, doesn't that also affect the time alignment? b) what are his "personal preferences" when he finally voices the speakers. Does he like a more tonally rich or textured sound, or is it more about pin-point imaging and soundstaging for him...or something else? would be interesting to know...
Well. He claims it’s the best speaker up to 5000$. Kind a bold I think. Hope you will get a pair to listen to John. I can’t afford them. But my dealer will probably let me listen to them.
Great interview, thanks. I’m beginning to develop a concept of the music I like, now I need to understand the equipment that will best achieve that sound in the room I’m listening in. I hope I’m learning more about musical sounds without being programmed to believe what is expected to be good by $$$. 😊
The diameter of the driver is 80%. Therefore the area is 64% and the volume is 51%. Having the same motor, the stroke will be the same. It is surprising that the parameters of the new driver perfectly match the volume of the proportionally smaller box. Is the veneer really 80% as thick?
Would I watch your review of an $80k pair of speakers? Yes. Maybe 1 or 2, just to know how unbelievably, unattainably fantastic they sound. But, yeah, I want to be able to stay happy with what my wife will let me afford.
I doubt it, as the woofer cone movement will start to become excessive and will intermodulate the sound from the tweeter. I'm sure there's an element to that with the Point 8.
It's a good thing Jones' expertise is in speakers and not cabinetry. The veneer on the top of the box should flow in the same direction as the sides. I suspect you did not have enough veneer left over to do the top properly but someone said 'Hey, if we rotate it 90 deg we can use up all our scrap veneer" 🤣
You have it completely wrong about the veneering of the cabinet, but it's perhaps understandable if you haven't looked closely at the cabinet and understood how it's constructed. The sides of the cabinet initially go straight back, but then taper inwards at 3 degrees. Unlike fully rectangular cabinets, where the cabinet can be constructed from pre-veneered board and v-grooved and folded, the semi- tapered cabinet has to be veneered after construction. If we choose veneer directions similar to pre-veneered, with the grain pattern going up one side, across the top, and down the other side, the grain will not match at the corners and will appear mismatch progressively towards the back. In addition, with the pre-veneered method the sides will not be book matched to each other besides being upside down on one side compared to the other. If we choose to book match the sides, and then choose grain direction to run side to side across the top, then we will have absolutely no grain matching at one of the corners. By running the grain on the top from front to back, we break the concept of trying to match the grain at the corners. We built cabinets with all the different variants of grain directions, and the one we have chosen was the very clear winner. Of course, it's subjective, some people will have different opinions. But at least you now no longer need to "suspect" or speculate about our veneer choices nor my cabinet skills.
I went, I saw, I was bored... Focal sounded like crap, Wilkins speakers were (subjective feeling) EVERYWHERE. Most high-end systems sounded like low-end, and most low and mid sounded like high-end... are these conferences pointless? Probably. Was there cool hardware? Sure. Nothing I'd like to buy. Did I get 90 days free Qobuz... yupp PS. I do have to make a small correction - Luxman and Vienna Acoustics (new Mozarts) were delicious! PS2. Boenicke actually presented their trash cans... lol PS3. ESD brought a city-level alert system tubes... who saw understands lol...
I love listening to Andrew Jones talk about speaker design. I learned a lot about coaxial drivers from this one. I hope at some point I’ll get to hear a Mofi Sourcepoint (either 8 or 10). They don’t seem to have much distribution here in Canada.😢
The Magnificent Loudspeaker Designer. 🫵💎✨👂🦋🙏🏼♾️🎶👂 Great interview. In this interview and many others like this one; I got a hidden message: We do need audiophile oriented architects to design living spaces that by default they have a good room response. Unfortunately in this regard we are not even close.
Gotta hand it to JD -- this is the best interview with AJ I've heard. Mainly because JD asked a few key questions and then let AJ have the time to respond without interruption.
Superb interview; great technical and "human" information regarding speaker performance in a room..
Superb interview, Andrew Jones is a living legend in speaker designs
Always love to hear the intellectual and informed ideas and thought processes of such experts. Really gives clarity over the noise we hear from less informed and stubborn opinions from every corner of the internet.
Love his speaker dialect 😀 So nice to listen to. Top end rolled of as all BBC speakers 😂 and I’m talking about Andrew.
I own the elacs ub5’s the image is holographic & I’ve been listening to magnepans since the 80’s. Dave matthews Tim Reynolds’s live at radio city 1077, I can see both guitars Dave’s voice & each guitar has a completely different sound, solid center image. Andrew Jones is a great speaker designer
Brilliant - a master class. And how generous of him to do this talk so comprehensively.
This was an awesome video.
This is SO true. The reality is - even from the artist’s vision - there is no fixed reality. Music is the art of the ephemeral. Nothing is fixed or permanent. From live performance, to recording and mixing and mastering, to speaker design, DAC implementation, headphone tunings, to EQ, to DSP, to different people with different hearing capabilities: we are living with live sound in live spaces and different situations…music is approximations, and close estimations. In this sense, we ought to embrace the differences rather than hold to music as fixed. Hence, there is no such thing as purity and we should enjoy the innovations and ambiguities of the auditory world and the meanings we can construe from them.
If it makes other people happy, you have a business. If it just makes you happy, you have a hobby. WISEST WORDS EVER!!
I love that he mentions that there is no "true to the original sound". There is no absolute truth. Go to a dozen recording studios, and you'll hear a dozen very different sounding monitor systems!
Excellent interview John, thank you. Mr. Jones is a very interesting engineer and obviously loves what he does very much. His enthusiasm can be felt throughout the interview.
My favorite piece of the interview was at around 38:00, when Mr. Jones said that a "speaker should to be independent to the type of music" - couldn't agree more :)
Thank you for sharing such a wonderful interview. I've been using some of Mr. Jone's KEF speakers for about 25 years!
Just about as much philosophy as engineering in Mr. Jones’ answers.
That was my first month of EE classes in college, all theoretical philosophical concepts. That was that professor's last semester before he retired.
This is a great overview of the engineers' considerations and process when designing a loudspeaker.
The concept of multi-microphone recording, like with the double-bass, is to have the possibility in the mixing process to be able to have all the advantageous parts of each microphone position and it’s corresponding frequency response/control of the recorded instrument and then to pick‘n‘mix those signals to (re)create a version, or even a very different creative version of the said instrument, in the example of the double bass, if present, the pick-up signal for very dry,controlled and transient rich signal, the close, or even in the f-hole for a harmonically rich but pure, so therefore very controllable in the fundamental „acoustic“ version of the sound, a microphone at say one meter to pick-up the „playing“ of the instrument with a „softer“ transient response, and, if required for the piece of music a distant microphone, or even a binaural one, to recreate the „ambience“ of the room or the perceived position of the listener, what is criticality is the time and phase alignment of all pickups/microphones after assembling the part(s) of each signal that you have chosen to assemble a realistic single instrument out of an artificial source, ie two or more loudspeakers. I must say as a professional sound engineer I do sometimes have a little chuckle to myself about some comments from audiophiles about the „purity“ of some recordings….and I think to myself, oh my, if only they knew…..“. There is a massive amount of signal manipulation goes on in between the instrument and whatever, the simplest and most direct way of taking moving air, turning it into moving electrons and back to moving air from an artificial source just purely because of its nature Alters the signal massively, even the (in)famous „direct to disc“ still have to go through mic/pre-amp/RIAA curve eq/cutting head driver amp……and let’s not even start with RIAA curves, extreme sad then smiley face eq‘s and an extremely hard single pole piece tracking a a v shaped cut in relatively soft plastic apparently doesn’t change the signal. Back in the days of am radio when mixing a song we made a 7“ mono mix, 7“ stereo mix, 12“ album cut mix, and if the time and money was there a 12“ 45 rpm mix, why might you ask? Well every Format had different limitations of dynamics and frequency response so….and people wonder why master tape to cd‘s sounded so awful…..yup, pure hi-fi……😂
Waiting for the SourcePoint 12.
Wow - this is, I think, the best interview about speaker design and about audio - that I have ever heard! Andrew Jones is articulate and lucid and plain-spoken - and I have gained a much better understanding of our hobby/love is about.
Thank you John and Andrew for this tutorial on all things audio.
Beautiful set of speakers he has made
Andrew Jones gives me the opportunity to listen my Pioneer BS22, they sound amazing.
John, what an excellent interview you have done, you have hit the nail on the head with the questions and Andrew has really lectured on what he knows.
Just two words. Thank you!
Great discussion.
Quite interesting , especially when you are a DIY.
Awesome so interesting!! Love it
Wow! A masterclass of an interview. Anyone who works with scientists or engineers on a daily basis will appreciate how much patience he’s exercising here, to explain things coherently and simply.
If someone is interested, the driver is based on SB Acoustics Satori MT19CP-8, also implemented in Kali IN-8 studio monitors in a smaller version.
I’m not a fan of the design, they’re a bit too blocky and old fashioned for me, but I have no doubt that they sound incredible.
I'm going to offset you... I love the way they look! But I it get it... yeah, it's very 70s-80s.
They are "blocky". An intentional attempt to mimick some of the design features of '70's speakers. But we understand that it won't be to everyone's taste. That's OK 😁
Next try to design one that works with the wall… like the Larsen 8 or 9.
Perhaps loudspeakers should be sold with room included. That way the designer will know what it's going to sound like in that room. Or a line of tiny homes designed by Andrew Jones might be tempting to someone.
They are if you're into car audio.....😉
Great interview!
His point is: there is not one way to make a good loudspeaker and the perfekt sound does only exist in your mind. Being able to live with a compromise is always the only way to a happy life and also to a satisfying listening experience...
'True-to-source' means getting the input signal out the speakers with as few non-linearities as possible. And since we weren't there at the recording studio the best we can do is use measurements where we know the input signal exactly. All that is left is pinpointing how the speaker's anechoic / Klippel measurements differ from the input signal and address it. AJ knows this of course and that's why he was confident enough showing the proto without even listening (as mentioned in the interview).
I would love to see an active sourcepoint 10 or 8. :)
Thanks John for this really excellent interview, one of your and Jones’ best efforts.
Amazing interview. Very informative. Thank you both.
Had the pleasure of meeting and chatting with Mr. Jones in Tampa earlier this year at the Florida Audio show. What a generous and gentle soul he is. John, I was SO hoping that you would ask him for examples of the music he uses as he voices his speakers. Regardless, he's a superstar and thanks for your interview.
I would love to see a comparison between the Zu DWX in superfly upgrade vs. the Mofi SourcePoint 8 (and SourcePoint 10 if possible). I have a pair of dirty weekend from a few years ago that I love, but I am getting that new speaker itch and I am interested in seeing the Mofi speakers but have love for Zu’s sound.
I was just thinking this.
Mofi is significantly more expensive however. So I'd go Zu personally.
They both sound fantastic (albeit, I’ve only heard the similar mofo source point 10’s and zu union 6’s). Would be a difficult choice to make. Yea, a side-by-side would be fun.
Great questions JD!
Excellent interview! Couple of things I hope he would have touched upon more: a) as the midrange driver moves, doesn't that also affect the time alignment? b) what are his "personal preferences" when he finally voices the speakers. Does he like a more tonally rich or textured sound, or is it more about pin-point imaging and soundstaging for him...or something else? would be interesting to know...
I'd be interested in a Source Point 15 myself.
Well. He claims it’s the best speaker up to 5000$. Kind a bold I think. Hope you will get a pair to listen to John. I can’t afford them. But my dealer will probably let me listen to them.
Very interesting speakers information! I am enjoying my Debut 5.2 .. next target the Reference 62. Thanks Andrew!
Great interview, thanks. I’m beginning to develop a concept of the music I like, now I need to understand the equipment that will best achieve that sound in the room I’m listening in. I hope I’m learning more about musical sounds without being programmed to believe what is expected to be good by $$$. 😊
I think going 10" down to 8" is the wrong way to go. Fyne makes a 12" dual concentric.
Such an entertaining and enlightening interview. This is one of your best John!
given the size of the point 8 and point 10 i don't see the point of the point 8 ... same footprint ...
did you ever get a chance to review the sourcepoint 8?
Anyone knows when the master-deck will be released ?
Great info here. A lot to take in and think about. Well done.
true to source is like cooking without spices or salt
Great interview, awesome speakers! :D
Andrew’s first sentence is a classic!
3inch maybe 3&1/2
Tf is a transcision?
The diameter of the driver is 80%. Therefore the area is 64% and the volume is 51%. Having the same motor, the stroke will be the same. It is surprising that the parameters of the new driver perfectly match the volume of the proportionally smaller box. Is the veneer really 80% as thick?
You got me on the veneer thickness....😉😁
Lol
That was fun.
Would I watch your review of an $80k pair of speakers? Yes. Maybe 1 or 2, just to know how unbelievably, unattainably fantastic they sound. But, yeah, I want to be able to stay happy with what my wife will let me afford.
What a guy! This is wonderful
Might there be a SourcePoint 6 in the near future?
I doubt it, as the woofer cone movement will start to become excessive and will intermodulate the sound from the tweeter. I'm sure there's an element to that with the Point 8.
I spoke with Andrew at Axpona and he said no way very emphatically.
Tnx patreon's.❤
the best speaker designer hands down 😀
Great interview. I wonder what music Andrew listens to when designing his speakers?
Apple bluetooth earbuds, 100%
It's a good thing Jones' expertise is in speakers and not cabinetry. The veneer on the top of the box should flow in the same direction as the sides. I suspect you did not have enough veneer left over to do the top properly but someone said 'Hey, if we rotate it 90 deg we can use up all our scrap veneer" 🤣
Agree with your design aesthetic but its not a deal breaker for me. However I can relate it would be to others !
You have it completely wrong about the veneering of the cabinet, but it's perhaps understandable if you haven't looked closely at the cabinet and understood how it's constructed. The sides of the cabinet initially go straight back, but then taper inwards at 3 degrees. Unlike fully rectangular cabinets, where the cabinet can be constructed from pre-veneered board and v-grooved and folded, the semi- tapered cabinet has to be veneered after construction. If we choose veneer directions similar to pre-veneered, with the grain pattern going up one side, across the top, and down the other side, the grain will not match at the corners and will appear mismatch progressively towards the back. In addition, with the pre-veneered method the sides will not be book matched to each other besides being upside down on one side compared to the other. If we choose to book match the sides, and then choose grain direction to run side to side across the top, then we will have absolutely no grain matching at one of the corners. By running the grain on the top from front to back, we break the concept of trying to match the grain at the corners. We built cabinets with all the different variants of grain directions, and the one we have chosen was the very clear winner. Of course, it's subjective, some people will have different opinions. But at least you now no longer need to "suspect" or speculate about our veneer choices nor my cabinet skills.
I went, I saw, I was bored... Focal sounded like crap, Wilkins speakers were (subjective feeling) EVERYWHERE. Most high-end systems sounded like low-end, and most low and mid sounded like high-end... are these conferences pointless? Probably. Was there cool hardware? Sure. Nothing I'd like to buy. Did I get 90 days free Qobuz... yupp
PS. I do have to make a small correction - Luxman and Vienna Acoustics (new Mozarts) were delicious!
PS2. Boenicke actually presented their trash cans... lol
PS3. ESD brought a city-level alert system tubes... who saw understands lol...
"most low and mid sounded like high-end", dude that sounds great. Low end price, high end sound? What's the problem?
@@xavdeman Conference bias... these setups can't work well in those conditions.
I am sure these are fantastic, but I wish they were Assembled here in the USA instead of China like all of the other Mobile Fidelity products are!
Better still assemble them in England :)
even if they are assembled in the US but still the raw materials are come from china
I love listening to Andrew Jones talk about speaker design. I learned a lot about coaxial drivers from this one. I hope at some point I’ll get to hear a Mofi Sourcepoint (either 8 or 10). They don’t seem to have much distribution here in Canada.😢
I believe the record centre in Ottawa is a dealer ... at least that is where I heard the 10s
Informative interview - not sure why Andrew Jones is miced up and you’re not…
Because it was a last minute decision to do the interview and I only brought one mic.
@@DarkoAudio makes sense
Platitudes
The Magnificent Loudspeaker Designer. 🫵💎✨👂🦋🙏🏼♾️🎶👂 Great interview. In this interview and many others like this one; I got a hidden message: We do need audiophile oriented architects to design living spaces that by default they have a good room response. Unfortunately in this regard we are not even close.