Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
72.207.28.112
In Reply to: RE: looks fantastic :) -nt posted by Green Lantern on January 03, 2009 at 18:06:45
Q: what speicies of wood was used?
The XO box exceeds even the best cigar humidors I've owned over the years (and I've owned some of the best). Almost a shame to keep em' 'hidden' behind the panels!
No doubt every ounce of 'Maggie magic' is tweaked from em'; certain to bring you many years of enjoyment.
Again; incredible craftsmanship props to Pete;).
Congrats!
Follow Ups:
The OP states ambrosia maple and peruvian walnut. It really does seem a shame to have those XO boxes hidden as they are - they are truly lovely. The details in this pair seem a step above (not that any of the previous editions were lacking in any way). Don't you just love how the walnut trim on the slanted side increases in thickness from top to bottom? This is the fourth time I've picked up my laptop today, and the last three were just to have another look at those beautiful speakers - incredible indeed!
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ
You must have been looking at them a lot to see that! You are correct that the maple and walnut have an aspect ratio which stays the same so as the maple increases in size the walnut does as well in proportion to it.
I am glad you like it. I must admit I am a little perplexed why modern designs are so much more immediately popular. That's my fault for being an 18th century joiner I suppose...
It's all about the music...
I think the standard models are beautiful as well. There is just something especially appealing about the non-parallel edge. The fact that you translated that into the aspect ratio of the walnut trim just serves to make it all the more pleasing to my eye. Those boxes are awesome too and I love the fact that the struts and bases are trimmed in walnut as well. You may refer to it as Apogee-like, but this one bests them at their own game. Your creation is far more attractive than an Apogee, IMO.I understand why you're perplexed, but I honestly think this one looks like a more expensive speaker - like something costing maybe $20,000. Perception is a weird thing. You have to admit that this was a somewhat more complicated build. I think the grain pattern of the chosen wood works (visually) very well with the joinery method used. You did an incredible job.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ
Edits: 01/05/09
The Apogee design is functional, the slant is designed with a tuning function.
Dave
Back when I got the shocker that there are people who not only prefer the MMG, but they actually kind of dislike the 1.6 even once modded the fact that all this is an issue of choice became abundantly clear. Still, I was caught be surprise at the reaction to these.
I think some apogees are really fugly, but the wood veneered ones are not. Of course they are not busy out back like a maggie is either, so there is more to look at. These probably carry that off without the severe industrial feel apogees can have. (although there will be those who prefer them for that reason too)
It is an entirely wrong way to think, but you are 100% correct when you say these are very modern looking and as such we assume, for whatever reason, that they are more expensive. (and why would we when we know that means mass production?) It is also very true that modern and futuristic stylings lend themselves to high end gear more. It suppose this is the beginning of the end for the old way then.
As for complexity, hiding the bases was simple and no more work. The problem with the frames came from the fact that all the grain runs up and down, even the top and bottom pieces. It will be impossible to do that in some species with a single piece, as you just can't get 9" widths in some things. In any case glue up might be better as this really runs the risk of warping as the bottoms are essentially close to a 2 foot wide board.
Doing all the glue up (and cutting out all the pieces) was time consuming, but the only real difficulty came from trying to make the edge pieces and cut them with the proper expanding taper. That was not fun, and it couldn't be done on the table saw. If this keeps needing to be done I am going to make a special box to cut them out in.
The funny part is I very much was looking forward to this build but the finishing issue turned it into the job from hell, and by the end I was so sick of them I just wanted them gone. It robbed me of any pleasure I had going in. (Like Ralphie shooting his eye out) I can't even say what the issue was because I don't know. I think it was a bad reaction caused by the peruvian walnut, but the finish went bad and the wood itself went bad. (got soft and stringy and nothing would dry on it) There were a few moments when I believed the whole thing would need to get tossed. It took every trick I know and a lot of luck to salvage them.
What I'm curious about now is what the reverse would look like - dark wood frames with a maple type trim.
It's all about the music...
I certainly don't make the 'rules'; I was just reporting my impression based on my understanding of them. For whatever reason, modern design and high end seem to usually converge (at least in the world of speakers (and turntables)).That angled side and the expanding trim are two of the components I had in mind when I suggested that this build had to be more complex than the standard one. In any case, I wouldn't pronounce a death sentence for the standard design simply because of the reaction to this one. I'd be proud to own either design (though, not quite as proud as I am to own something I cooked up myself - warts and all), and I'm sure the general public is divided in its preference. As someone mentioned, there are advantages to the rectangle - one can place them tweeters in or out for one.
I'm sorry to read about the problems you had with this build and the sour taste in left in your mouth, but I'm happy to see that it all came out right in the end.
"Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ
Edits: 01/06/09
of what an "old style" frame might look like, maybe not the regular Maggie rectangle? I'm trying to picture what an "antique" looking Maggie might look like. After all, most tube amps still look "old school". To me, those dang Pass amps look pretty much futuristic, don't you think?
Still, I may be barking up the wrong tree. (Sorry)
"If people don't want to come, nothing will stop them" - Sol Hurok
I'm not sure you can compare amps and speakers. Being an obvious wooden thing, a stand looks more like furniture. An amp is an amp, even if it has tubes. Besides, most old tube amps hid the tubes, and those that did not looked like this
and now they look like this
So it is easy to date them. It's like when you see a green, tan or yellow home appliance, you know it's from the 70's.
When I first made stands I designed it as a utilitarian thing, and so defaulted to a very basic look. I was originally going to mortise and tennon the pieces as well but the guy who first wanted them wanted mitered corners instead if possible, so that's why I even did it that way. I am used to building Pennsylvania German styled things and that is a bit of a "husky" style. I always very much disliked the Krenov school of modern design. To them, this is a cabinet...
To me it's just adapting, actually adulterating, japanese design to western values. But yes, it's all "modern" and clean looking.
I would build a cabinet to look like the thing on the chest below. That to me is a cabinet, and frankly more attractive
But it's apples and oranges and I am now beginning to realize that perhaps my old values do not, and should not apply in this genre and that if I am going to be doing this, I need to make the stands match the rest of the stuff it will be getting used with. I know in the past there were always people quick to chime in comments about my stands such as "Nice job, but I don't like the way they look". That has not been said about these.
Just more irony for my ever ironic life. I spent years learning all I could about the early period designs I loved, and meanwhile despised the modern ethic going on around me, and now lo and behold it has consumed me as well.
It's all about the music...
"now lo and behold it has consumed me as well"
Welcome to our consumer society. :^0
My speaks look "O.K." from the front but they got that big butt ugly in the rear (appropriate, no?). Gotta have that cone woofer for bass.
Roger Sanders has made an effort to dress the butt up in wood. Perhaps it's lipstick on a pig. My older Innersounds are metal. I've never seen any electrostatics that looked any better than what Maggies look like, mostly room dividers or in the case of old Quads, space heaters. I used to have Martin-Logan CLSIIz and some folks think they were the best looking M-Ls (faint praise, indeed) but they were just a little fancier looking sans the butt. Maybe it's being able to see through the panel that's the attraction with some stats. I've always liked see through!
"If people don't want to come, nothing will stop them" - Sol Hurok
I See it now! I was in a hurry this am on the way to work and kind of just glanced over the post;)
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: