It's basically a giant magnet, with a transducer attached for good measure. Sort of a brute-force approach to the B-L curve problem. I can't see anything in the way of unique technology that would prevent Tymphany, GGEC and Easttech etc, from making something similar, but with higher production quality and lower cost, due to their fully automated production lines.
@@THDPodcast I have seen similar approaches used for the design of drivers used on products like the Bose Mini Soundlink (GGEC), it probably makes more sense when scaled down to smaller drivers that need to be inside small enclosures. It is unlikely that any of their 'secret sauce' design techniques are able to get patent protection, there is just too much prior art in the space. This just seems too expensive for premium consumer and "not expensive enough" for the "fart sniffing" HiFi folk. The other issue is logistics, if these drivers get a good design-win with, say a decent sized premium brand like B&W, B&O, etc, then the drivers need to be shipped to China anyway for assembly into the product. That is a major headache with customs, transport costs, lead times, etc. What Kartesian do have, is a very smart engineering and design team, at some point they will have to figure out that this is actually their 'product', but trying to be a European transducer manufacturer is going to be a great way for the founders to burn their life savings...
@@THDPodcast I'm sure there is and I wish these guys the very best of luck in finding those markets. "Large" is a relative term though, what small/medium brands in the EU might think of as a large production order and what GGEC might consider a large production order, are separated by at least 3 orders of magnitude.
Yes we have IP protection, but we believe creativity is better protection. Nobody can copy creativity, China can only copy what’s already existe. Some of our innovation are directly sold to brands, without market introduction by Kartesian. We started business on 2011, with affordable growth, and the wish to overcome usual technical constraints by innovation. This is what we daily do. In a world saturated by entry level products, we prefer keep human scale, taking care of quality and details.
The huge peak+dip between 300-500Hz and 2HD@2kHz seems to be a problem, also multitone distortion would better display the true dynamic range. Expensive motor with cheap NBR surround is not good, NBR has very poor damping. Butyl would help improve mid-freq. distortion.
@@kartesian5737 NBR is heavy also medium damping, SBR has low damping which raises Qms and BR has high damping which decreases Qms. Medium damped surround really doesn't help the performance IMO.
@@naomispirit-evokingemotion2267 Yes, NBR has higher density than SBR: around 0.06g/cm^3, which make less than 0.2g difference for a 6 -7" woofer, ...1% of average moving mass. Price is very similar for both materials. We believe NBR has some advantages, manly, it is more customisable. There are dozens of parameters which can be changed in material formulation to reach required elasticity, hardness, damping, withdraw, ... We are not able to make general conclusion as you do to compare NBR and SBR.
Can you do demo of the speakers?
It's basically a giant magnet, with a transducer attached for good measure. Sort of a brute-force approach to the B-L curve problem.
I can't see anything in the way of unique technology that would prevent Tymphany, GGEC and Easttech etc, from making something similar, but with higher production quality and lower cost, due to their fully automated production lines.
@project-326 that's a good question. Is there any IP to protect their design?
@@THDPodcast I have seen similar approaches used for the design of drivers used on products like the Bose Mini Soundlink (GGEC), it probably makes more sense when scaled down to smaller drivers that need to be inside small enclosures. It is unlikely that any of their 'secret sauce' design techniques are able to get patent protection, there is just too much prior art in the space.
This just seems too expensive for premium consumer and "not expensive enough" for the "fart sniffing" HiFi folk.
The other issue is logistics, if these drivers get a good design-win with, say a decent sized premium brand like B&W, B&O, etc, then the drivers need to be shipped to China anyway for assembly into the product. That is a major headache with customs, transport costs, lead times, etc.
What Kartesian do have, is a very smart engineering and design team, at some point they will have to figure out that this is actually their 'product', but trying to be a European transducer manufacturer is going to be a great way for the founders to burn their life savings...
@@project-326 There is a large market for drivers manufactured in Europe that never need to go to China. Beyma, DAS, and B&C all come to mind.
@@THDPodcast I'm sure there is and I wish these guys the very best of luck in finding those markets. "Large" is a relative term though, what small/medium brands in the EU might think of as a large production order and what GGEC might consider a large production order, are separated by at least 3 orders of magnitude.
Yes we have IP protection, but we believe creativity is better protection.
Nobody can copy creativity, China can only copy what’s already existe. Some of our innovation are directly sold to brands, without market introduction by Kartesian. We started business on 2011, with affordable growth, and the wish to overcome usual technical constraints by innovation. This is what we daily do. In a world saturated by entry level products, we prefer keep human scale, taking care of quality and details.
The huge peak+dip between 300-500Hz and 2HD@2kHz seems to be a problem, also multitone distortion would better display the true dynamic range. Expensive motor with cheap NBR surround is not good, NBR has very poor damping. Butyl would help improve mid-freq. distortion.
Thanks for input!
NBR is general term, we don’t use basic rubber surround on shelves. It is possible to built good and bad surround based on NBR materials.
@@kartesian5737 NBR is heavy also medium damping, SBR has low damping which raises Qms and BR has high damping which decreases Qms. Medium damped surround really doesn't help the performance IMO.
@@naomispirit-evokingemotion2267 Yes, NBR has higher density than SBR: around 0.06g/cm^3, which make less than 0.2g difference for a 6 -7" woofer, ...1% of average moving mass. Price is very similar for both materials. We believe NBR has some advantages, manly, it is more customisable. There are dozens of parameters which can be changed in material formulation to reach required elasticity, hardness, damping, withdraw, ... We are not able to make general conclusion as you do to compare NBR and SBR.