Poll: What do we want next?

[D'Argo]

Subwoofer with XBL2 for me. Something to rival Emotiva's X-Ref Subs.

[ryansboston]

Thanks gtp for starting this up, I've been meaning to and just haven't gotten around to it yet. I am SUPER interested in an Arx dedicated surround speaker that could preferably switch to act as bipole or dipole. If it adds too much cost/complexity to the project, than I think an adaptive dipole (Tweeters not in phase, woofer in phase) would be best in order to create the diffusing-surround effect with the tweeters but still allow the woofer to have decent mid-range and bass. It would be great if it was light enough to be wall-mountable since the generally recommended height is 2 feet above ear level at seating position..

I agree in general with the design of a woofer flanked by two ribbon tweeters on each side at an angle, but given what Jon said about the A1s (quoted below) I wonder if it makes sense to have a smaller XBL2 woofer in this surround, one that doesn't have baffle step compensation?

I also think it should be smaller if the intention is to be able to wall mount them... otherwise it will likely be way too heavy.. Along the same lines, as much as the XBL2 woofers are awesome, due to their massive amount of excursion, wouldn't they require a lot more depth than a wall-mountable design would realistically allow?


Alternatively, I would be extremely happy with a heavier dedicated surround with an A5 woofer flanked by the ribbon tweeters as a surround - with the caveat that there was a custom-designed stand that could be sold alongside with it that would still allow them to be placed in tighter spaces.. (Say, 2-3 feet for side surround speakers and 1-2 feet for rear surround- pretty much immediately behind the couch and right against a wall) However this would be yet another side project and add complexity.


As far as the Arx XBL2 subwoofer goes, I think it sounds like a VERY interesting idea, but for me personally I would likely only be purchasing the dedicated surrounds as I am not planning on upgrading my sub for a few years.

The A1 were designed to be closer to full-space speakers - although on the small end of the speaker scale - than to specific on-wall speakers. They have baffle step compensation and will tend to sound big and fuller-bodied than an onwall or nearfield system designed to use boundary loading.
That said, they don't (can't) have a huge bottom end and if you use them with the plugs installed as acoustic suspension speakers along with the small speaker setting in your AVR/processor they should be fine.

[gtpsuper24]

I think an XBL2 subwoofer from Arx could get alot of attention from other forums like AVS. Theres a lot of bass heads out there, that would be very happy with the introduction of a new high performance low cost subwoofer.

[Chane M&C]

Since the A5s seem to be a big hit with the group buy, I though we could start a thread on what we would like to see next. Maybe Jon could get a poll started and list various options that are within reason.

I noticed on one of the pages Jon mentioned dedicated surrounds for 2012 MAYBE. Had some ideas pop in that I though would be cool.

A surround using the A5s midrange centered flanked with a ribbon tweeter on each side at and angle.

Or use a woofer and tweeter pair at and angle 45degrees maybe.

Something else that I would like is a Arx XBL2 subwoofer I think it would be something that could come together faster than the surrounds.

A brilliant idea, gtpsuper24, and thanks. I've added a poll. The A5 is already complete and awaits production, and an A6 is largely designed and only needs our go-ahead. I have some news for you all on a high output powered Arx sub I'll post shortly... ;)

[Chane M&C]

Subwoofer with XBL2 for me. Something to rival Emotiva's X-Ref Subs.

I want to ask a tough question: In the sea of ID subs (most of which do not completely agree with TAI's design philosophy on subs, I'll add) does the world really need more? In other words, while we could rather easily add another loud me-too bass system (or six), how would we differentiate these products except by name?

[gtpsuper24]

The A6 might be a great idea. But would if offer better or worst performance than the current models and A5? Or would it be for someone who wants a monster sized center with identical mains.

The ID brands IMO have gotten away from the bang for the buck. Arx needs a sub that would get the bassheads attention like the subwoofer forum at AVS or HTS. It seems like whenever a new subwoofer comes out like HSUs VTF 15H they just gotta have it. I think a high end Arx sub that competes with the VTF 15H and SVS PB 12+ would get peoples attention.

[Chane M&C]

I am SUPER interested in an Arx dedicated surround speaker that could preferably switch to act as bipole or dipole. If it adds too much cost/complexity to the project, than I think an adaptive dipole (Tweeters not in phase, woofer in phase) would be best in order to create the diffusing-surround effect with the tweeters but still allow the woofer to have decent mid-range and bass. It would be great if it was light enough to be wall-mountable since the generally recommended height is 2 feet above ear level at seating position..

I agree in general with the design of a woofer flanked by two ribbon tweeters on each side at an angle, but given what Jon said about the A1s (quoted below) I wonder if it makes sense to have a smaller XBL2 woofer in this surround, one that doesn't have baffle step compensation?

I also think it should be smaller if the intention is to be able to wall mount them... otherwise it will likely be way too heavy.. Along the same lines, as much as the XBL2 woofers are awesome, due to their massive amount of excursion, wouldn't they require a lot more depth than a wall-mountable design would realistically allow?

From all of this I think we can draw the following about a smaller effects speaker:

• Bi/dipolar
• Relatively compact
• 2-way
• Highpassed at 80Hz

Within these constraints I have the product profile all but ready to develop, all the more so if we can settle on 100% dipolar action for which we have a fabulous option. It'd be relatively inexpensive too.

Alternatively, I would be extremely happy with a heavier dedicated surround with an A5 woofer flanked by the ribbon tweeters as a surround - with the caveat that there was a custom-designed stand that could be sold alongside with it that would still allow them to be placed in tighter spaces.. (Say, 2-3 feet for side surround speakers and 1-2 feet for rear surround- pretty much immediately behind the couch and right against a wall) However this would be yet another side project and add complexity.

The primary determinant for a large effects speaker is the bass section, for which we need to settle on the low frequency knee and maximum loudness. Meaning that dedicated theater room effects speakers require a fundamentally different approach below the treble crossover point of they're going to keep up with a large front stage.

Such a product is larger and has about twice the maximum output of the smaller effects speaker.

As far as the Arx XBL2 subwoofer goes, I think it sounds like a VERY interesting idea, but for me personally I would likely only be purchasing the dedicated surrounds as I am not planning on upgrading my sub for a few years.

Understood. We have two sub options in the poll, the larger of which is already designed.

[Skrrrg]

I think Jon's concern is quite valid regarding sub-woofers. Building one that can differentiate itself from the rest of the pack will be difficult. Sub-woofers don't image, there is no critical crossover tuning to do, an no need to voice match it to the rest of the system. As a result, people are free to pick and choose among products or use what they already have.

I vote for dedicated surround speakers over a sub-woofer. I know some of the planar tweeters can operate in true dipole mode by removing the rear cover plate. I've been wondering if it is possible to build an open-baffle dipole that would properly voice match to the rest of the system. It's an interesting concept if nothing else that would set it apart from other solutions on the market.

[Chane M&C]

The A6 might be a great idea. But would if offer better or worst performance than the current models and A5? Or would it be for someone who wants a monster sized center with identical mains.

The A6 is designed to be a vertical 5.25" center section like the A1 but using the special A5 midrange driver. This center capsule is flanked by a pair of 6.5" SplitGap woofers in acoustic suspension, an Arx first. It's six to eight ohms.

It's basically a squarish, high-output A5 that has less sensitivity and F3 than the A5, but because of the shallower bass rolloff, is easy to set and use in "small speaker" at 80Hz for a ton of output. It's also designed without much baffle step compensation, making it more ideal for screen wall loading.

The intended market is dedicated theater rooms up to moderate size and loudness. For really big rooms and reference levels to the back of the space a larger product is probably called for, and would probably be partially horn loaded. The A6's advantage is simply better fidelity and dispersion than such horn setups, at least for anywhere near the A6's probably price.

The ID brands IMO have gotten away from the bang for the buck. Arx needs a sub that would get the bassheads attention like the subwoofer forum at AVS or HTS. It seems like whenever a new subwoofer comes out like HSUs VTF 15H they just gotta have it. I think a high end Arx sub that competes with the VTF 15H and SVS PB 12+ would get peoples attention.

Agreed about many ID brands, which is a testament to the technical excellence of ID brands in general, which in many cases can compete product-for-product as much as they do dollar-for-dollar.

The trendiness of bassheads can be cause for a manufacturer's concern, so while TAI has a reputation for a lot of great fullrange speakers, we've not pursued all the ID bass brands already out there.

That said, Arx can fairly rapidly draw on the success of the long-gone Acculine ASub, which was a very simple but good sounding 10" bass reflex sub for a bargain price. Arx can duplicate this category.

Arx can also put a real powerhouse subwoofer forward that consumes less than 24" on a side. I'll post that info next.

[Chane M&C]

I think Jon's concern is quite valid regarding sub-woofers. Building one that can differentiate itself from the rest of the pack will be difficult. Sub-woofers don't image, there is no critical crossover tuning to do, an no need to voice match it to the rest of the system. As a result, people are free to pick and choose among products or use what they already have.

Very observant, Skrrrg, and it summarizes our thinking exactly. We have what we think are alternatives to the usual boom-in-a-box, and I think we can provide them for Arx too, but unless we can offer a bona fide advantage, we're probably going to be reluctant to jump into the usual subwoofer pool.

I vote for dedicated surround speakers over a sub-woofer. I know some of the planar tweeters can operate in true dipole mode by removing the rear cover plate. I've been wondering if it is possible to build an open-baffle dipole that would properly voice match to the rest of the system. It's an interesting concept if nothing else that would set it apart from other solutions on the market.

Also very perceptive - you've basically pointed out just where we're headed for this model. More on this later.

Overall a great comment and thank you...

[ryansboston]

I want to ask a tough question: In the sea of ID subs (most of which do not completely agree with TAI's design philosophy on subs, I'll add) does the world really need more? In other words, while we could rather easily add another loud me-too bass system (or six), how would we differentiate these products except by name?

The ID brands IMO have gotten away from the bang for the buck. Arx needs a sub that would get the bassheads attention like the subwoofer forum at AVS or HTS. It seems like whenever a new subwoofer comes out like HSUs VTF 15H they just gotta have it. I think a high end Arx sub that competes with the VTF 15H and SVS PB 12+ would get peoples attention.

Although I'm not in the market for it, I am intrigued by subwoofer forums and read them entirely WAY too much. I agree with gtp- subs that offer a ton of value, bang for the buck will do well in differentiating themselves in the market flooded with a lot of good choices..


I think the 4 best target markets to go after are the following: (Please forgive my broad generalizations... this is just my opinion)

"Budget" $300 and under: generally somewhat decent performance to about 30Hz. Usually better for budget HTs.
Biggest Competitors- BIC, Lava 10 and 12, Energy S10, etc.

"High value, decent performance" ~$550: generally decent performance to about 20Hz, with louder SPL capabilities. Usually recommended for people who want a "Real" sub that has decent performance both for Music and HT
Biggest Competitors- HSU, Emotiva, Epik, Rythmik, Outlaw

"High value, high performance"~$1,000: generally very good performance to about 17Hz, with MUCH louder SPL capabilities. Usually for those real bassheads that want to feel the bass in movies and listen loud
Biggest Competitors- HSU (specifically VTF-15H), CHT, SVS

"HT Enthusiasts that don't want to DIY, but want best performance~$2,200+: PHENOMENAL performance to about 14Hz, with ridiculous SPL capabilities. For those that demand the best and sometimes have truly dedicated HTs and are enthusiasts, and demand the Hz performance in the teens..
Biggest Competitors- The kings: Seaton HP Submersive, JR Captivator Others as well, such as JL and Paradigm but not talked up as much as the SubM and Captivator..

Other thoughts:
-Elemental Designs also have a big following but I've been noticing they been getting recommended less and less due to various issues.. they would go in the $550 and 1k category
-CHT is known for their bang for the buck and great performance, but most agree their WAF/exterior appearance of the subs is usually very lacking (but has been slowly improving)
-HSU has a rock-solid rep and is recommended a lot
-The highest sales volumes likely occur in the ~$300 and ~$550 categories as most people can't justify or can't afford to spend more on a subwoofer.. but you would make a ton of sub enthusiasts dreams come true if you could really produce a ~$1,000 sub that could top the SubM or Cap...


What would REALLY get people's attention is if you could provide a TREMENDOUS Bang for the buck offering in which you have a sub at one of the first three cost levels that gives the performance of the subs in the next one.. This would likely be the hottest topic at all the audio forums and you would see orders flying in, and your reputation would grow leaps and bounds.. I know, easier said than done.. but I think it is possible.

I can't wait to read your announcement on the "real powerhouse subwoofer" that you mentioned... if it is able to do what I mentioned above you will have a real winner that will sell faster than you can produce them once reviews are out and people recognize the tremendous value offering..

[gtpsuper24]

-The highest sales volumes likely occur in the ~$300 and ~$550 categories as most people can't justify or can't afford to spend more on a subwoofer.. but you would make a ton of sub enthusiasts dreams come true if you could really produce a ~$1,000 sub that could top the SubM or Cap...

I totally agree. I don't know what Jon's plans are but a XBL/XBL2 sub in the $350-$700 range would get alot of attention. I don't know that its possible to produce a commercial sub in the $1K range that would beat or match the SubM or Cap or even the PB13Ultra. I think the true "sweet spot" for top performing would be the VTF15H, Epik Empire, SVS PB12+ range. Performance in that range with a slightly lower cost, keeping it basic just raw performance without the DSP eqs and variable Q tuning type addons, which add to the cost.

[Chane M&C]

I think the 4 best target markets to go after are the following:

• Budget $300 and under
• High value, decent performance ~$550
• High value, high performance ~$1,000
• HT Enthusiasts that don't want to DIY, but want best performance ~$2,200+

Accepting these categories (and abridging them for clarity) I'd respond like this:

• Budget $300 and under. Certainly the easiest to bring to market, and with our history with the Acculine ASub plus our abilities with Arx for the money, all but guaranteed to excel in-category. Such an Arx product also faces stiffest competition here, but if we could break into SplitGap for under, say, $400? Intriguing, to say the least.
• High value, decent performance ~$550. Probably of least interest initially, but could form the meat of a broader line of Arx subs in time. I say of the least initial interest because real sonic differentiation here is tough. SplitGap really helps, but I want to do something much different than the all the usual just-loud black boxes. But something to talk about and I solicit your opinions.
• High value, high performance ~$1,000. At least as intriguing as the budget class because here we can really start to do interesting things.
• Enthusiast class ~$2,200+. Owing to the lack of creativity in the current sub class, this is the most interesting of all, but more in a theoretical sense than in a practical and/or commercial sense.

TAI could - and should - do some tremendous things between these last two classes limited only by the costs of the technology and products themselves. Value is still very important, especially to Arx-branded product, but in a world of the same-old, I'm keeping an eye on this category.

-The highest sales volumes likely occur in the ~$300 and ~$550 categories as most people can't justify or can't afford to spend more on a subwoofer.. but you would make a ton of sub enthusiasts dreams come true if you could really produce a ~$1,000 sub that could top the SubM or Cap...

I'm seeing this all roughly the same. Really good stuff, ryan.

What would REALLY get people's attention is if you could provide a TREMENDOUS Bang for the buck offering in which you have a sub at one of the first three cost levels that gives the performance of the subs in the next one.. This would likely be the hottest topic at all the audio forums and you would see orders flying in, and your reputation would grow leaps and bounds.. I know, easier said than done.. but I think it is possible.

TAI will have some internal talks and see how well our $1000 concept translates down to half that. It's possible; the question is if performance would exceed the market's expectations as they stand. This lower-middle tier is saturated, and like I said, could offer less in the way of really outstanding product concepts.

I can't wait to read your announcement on the "real powerhouse subwoofer" that you mentioned... if it is able to do what I mentioned above you will have a real winner that will sell faster than you can produce them once reviews are out and people recognize the tremendous value offering..

Ok, next post; promise. ;)

[Chane M&C]

I totally agree. I don't know what Jon's plans are but a XBL/XBL2 sub in the $350-$700 range would get alot of attention.

Good to hear because I think this is actually possible.

I don't know that its possible to produce a commercial sub in the $1K range that would beat or match the SubM or Cap or even the PB13Ultra. I think the true "sweet spot" for top performing would be the VTF15H, Epik Empire, SVS PB12+ range. Performance in that range with a slightly lower cost, keeping it basic just raw performance without the DSP eqs and variable Q tuning type addons, which add to the cost.

How does this strike you? Basic parameters are $1,000 ID-only, 1,000watts, triple 12" drivers, passive-radiatored, and under 24" square.

[Aus10]

Is there any talk on some rear speakers?