Von Schweikert Loudspeakers

[Steve Behman]

I own a pair of VR-4's and I understand that Albert is selling upgrades for
them. Does anyone who has this upgrade have any comments about it/them?

[All Ears]

"Steve Behman" > wrote in message
...
> I own a pair of VR-4's and I understand that Albert is selling upgrades
for
> them. Does anyone who has this upgrade have any comments about it/them?
>

Would be interesting to hear Mr. Pierce's opinions on Albert's design
claims......

KE

[Steve Behman]

Pardon my ignorance but who is Mr. Pierce? Is he someone I should know?

Steve

"All Ears" > wrote in message
...
> "Steve Behman" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I own a pair of VR-4's and I understand that Albert is selling upgrades
> for
> > them. Does anyone who has this upgrade have any comments about it/them?
> >
>
> Would be interesting to hear Mr. Pierce's opinions on Albert's design
> claims......
>
> KE
>

[Stewart Pinkerton]

On 1 Sep 2003 15:59:39 GMT, "Steve Behman" >
wrote:

>Pardon my ignorance but who is Mr. Pierce? Is he someone I should know?

Unlike Albert 'von' Schweikert, Dick Pierce is a highly skilled
speaker designer, who knows the subject inside out.

The original VR-4 is a classic example of a 'one-hit wonder',
genuinely excellent speaker designed by happy chance, and never
repeated, because the designer didn't really understand his subject.
This much was obvious from his long-running debate with John Dunlavy
in this forum.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

[All Ears]

"Steve Behman" > wrote in message
...
> Pardon my ignorance but who is Mr. Pierce? Is he someone I should know?

Mr. Pierce would normally be willing to share his opinions about speaker
related issues, on a high technical level.

If you post a link or a technical description of the upgrade and the
proposed improvements, I'm sure you would get some comments.

I will though mention that Mr. von Schweikert seems to have some problems in
explaining his design claims, using aknowleged standards and terms.

KE

[TonyP]

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2003 15:59:39 GMT, "Steve Behman" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Pardon my ignorance but who is Mr. Pierce? Is he someone I should know?
>
>
> Unlike Albert 'von' Schweikert, Dick Pierce is a highly skilled
> speaker designer, who knows the subject inside out.
>
> The original VR-4 is a classic example of a 'one-hit wonder',
> genuinely excellent speaker designed by happy chance, and never
> repeated, because the designer didn't really understand his subject.
> This much was obvious from his long-running debate with John Dunlavy
> in this forum.

Not being one of technical background, and having read the "discussion"
between John Dunlavy (whose Duntech Sovereign's I drooled over way back
when), I am sort of "stuck". According to some information I have read,
it would lead one to believe the von Schweikert does know something
about speaker design. Working under Richard C. Heyser in the physics lab
at California Institute of Technology, I'm sure something would have
rubbed off on him. He also designed the first linear phase crossovers
for Dr. Oscar Heil's AMT speakers (1982). In the late '80's, he had a
job as driver designer and QA engineer with KSC Industries and worked on
projects for companies as Apogee, Bose, Cerwin Vega, JBL, Jensen, NHT,
Paramount Pictures.... 1991 consultant to Counterpoint Electronics and
designed the Clearfield Continental and Metropolitan systems along with
a Home Theater speaker system. Lucasfilm's equipment design division,
THX, hired him for theater sound system evaluation in 1994, and was
recommended as a qualified THX designer to other manufacturers.
Unless all these "credentials" are false, it would lead one to believe
that he does know "something" about speakers.
With the complexity of speaker design, how someone could come up with a
'one-hit wonder', 'designed by happy chance' seems to be a stretch.
I own the original VR4's, and they are a very good sounding speaker
system. Sure, there is the mix of hi-fi "speak" with all it's catch
phrasing that is rampant in hi-end audio as a whole. But the finished
product is what really matters. How it sounds (or... doesn't sound). I
respect Mr. Dunlavy because I have heard the fruits of his labor and
wish I could afford them. Mr. Pierce is someone that has forgotten more
than I could ever know. And Mr. Von Schweikert built a speaker system
that just plain sounds great.
And in end, isn't that what it is all about?

[Stewart Pinkerton]

On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 04:16:10 GMT, TonyP > wrote:

>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
>> On 1 Sep 2003 15:59:39 GMT, "Steve Behman" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Pardon my ignorance but who is Mr. Pierce? Is he someone I should know?
>>
>> Unlike Albert 'von' Schweikert, Dick Pierce is a highly skilled
>> speaker designer, who knows the subject inside out.
>>
>> The original VR-4 is a classic example of a 'one-hit wonder',
>> genuinely excellent speaker designed by happy chance, and never
>> repeated, because the designer didn't really understand his subject.
>> This much was obvious from his long-running debate with John Dunlavy
>> in this forum.
>
>Not being one of technical background, and having read the "discussion"
>between John Dunlavy (whose Duntech Sovereign's I drooled over way back
>when), I am sort of "stuck". According to some information I have read,
> it would lead one to believe the von Schweikert does know something
>about speaker design. Working under Richard C. Heyser in the physics lab
>at California Institute of Technology, I'm sure something would have
>rubbed off on him. He also designed the first linear phase crossovers
>for Dr. Oscar Heil's AMT speakers (1982). In the late '80's, he had a
>job as driver designer and QA engineer with KSC Industries and worked on
>projects for companies as Apogee, Bose, Cerwin Vega, JBL, Jensen, NHT,
>Paramount Pictures.... 1991 consultant to Counterpoint Electronics and
>designed the Clearfield Continental and Metropolitan systems along with
>a Home Theater speaker system. Lucasfilm's equipment design division,
>THX, hired him for theater sound system evaluation in 1994, and was
>recommended as a qualified THX designer to other manufacturers.
>Unless all these "credentials" are false, it would lead one to believe
>that he does know "something" about speakers.

If you did indeed follow the Dunlavy/Shweikert thread, you should also
have come across the deconstruction of all those 'credentials' that
Albert posted on his website. The man is simply *not* a trained
engineer, despite having worked *in* many well-respected
organisations. He talked himself into several good places - but look
how long he lasted!

Compare and contrast with Dave Wilson, who is also a self-taught
speaker designer with little formal training, but whose speakers have
a recognisable family sound and are the product of steady development
over many years of consistent progress.

>With the complexity of speaker design, how someone could come up with a
>'one-hit wonder', 'designed by happy chance' seems to be a stretch.

Not really, since he never repeated that first success, and there's no
consistency in his designs.

>I own the original VR4's, and they are a very good sounding speaker
>system. Sure, there is the mix of hi-fi "speak" with all it's catch
>phrasing that is rampant in hi-end audio as a whole.

Quite so, in sharp contrast with Dunlavy or Wilson products.

> But the finished
>product is what really matters. How it sounds (or... doesn't sound). I
>respect Mr. Dunlavy because I have heard the fruits of his labor and
>wish I could afford them. Mr. Pierce is someone that has forgotten more
>than I could ever know. And Mr. Von Schweikert built a speaker system
>that just plain sounds great.
>And in end, isn't that what it is all about?

Indeed yes, but beware of anyone attempting to cash in on the
reputation of a single serendipitous product, when he clearly has no
idea how to do the same trick again!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

[TonyP]

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> If you did indeed follow the Dunlavy/Shweikert thread, you should
> also have come across the deconstruction of all those 'credentials'
> that Albert posted on his website. The man is simply *not* a trained
> engineer, despite having worked *in* many well-respected
> organisations. He talked himself into several good places - but look
> how long he lasted!

I re-read the thread and basically, all that was brought into question
was his (Von Schweikert) training under Heyser. As for how long he
lasted with other good places, that is something that either he, or the
places of employment will have to say what happened. Everything else is
speculation.

> Compare and contrast with Dave Wilson, who is also a self-taught
> speaker designer with little formal training, but whose speakers have
> a recognisable family sound and are the product of steady
> development over many years of consistent progress.

No doubt, Dave Wilson is a force to be reckoned with in the speaker
market. His products have received good reviews. But the same can be
said about Von Schweikert's. As for recognizable family sound, I have
heard the VR6's, and was impressed by what I heard.

>> With the complexity of speaker design, how someone could come up
>> with a 'one-hit wonder', 'designed by happy chance' seems to be a
>> stretch.
>
>
> Not really, since he never repeated that first success, and there's
> no consistency in his designs.

What would be considered a repeat success? As for consistency in design,
I would still have to go by the finished product. I personally don't
care how the achieve it, what labels the designers attach to it, or what
technobabble is printed on paper. I care about the finished product.

>> I own the original VR4's, and they are a very good sounding speaker
>> system. Sure, there is the mix of hi-fi "speak" with all it's
>> catch phrasing that is rampant in hi-end audio as a whole.
>
>
> Quite so, in sharp contrast with Dunlavy or Wilson products.

Still, does not take anything away from the finished product. Most of
audio seem to thrive on coming up with new "technical" words, that for
the most part, are meaningless or hold no real value to the listener.

>> But the finished product is what really matters. How it sounds
>> (or... doesn't sound). I respect Mr. Dunlavy because I have heard
>> the fruits of his labor and wish I could afford them. Mr. Pierce is
>> someone that has forgotten more than I could ever know. And Mr. Von
>> Schweikert built a speaker system that just plain sounds great. And
>> in end, isn't that what it is all about?
>
>
> Indeed yes, but beware of anyone attempting to cash in on the
> reputation of a single serendipitous product, when he clearly has no
> idea how to do the same trick again!

Have you evaluated his other products? What did you not like about them.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the products his company has
produced and how they compare to others in their price range. And I
would still say, designing the VR4 could not just happen by chance.

[Richard D Pierce]

In article >,
TonyP > wrote:
>Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> > If you did indeed follow the Dunlavy/Shweikert thread, you should
> > also have come across the deconstruction of all those 'credentials'
> > that Albert posted on his website. The man is simply *not* a trained
> > engineer, despite having worked *in* many well-respected
> > organisations. He talked himself into several good places - but look
> > how long he lasted!
>
>I re-read the thread and basically, all that was brought into question
>was his (Von Schweikert) training under Heyser. As for how long he
>lasted with other good places, that is something that either he, or the
>places of employment will have to say what happened. Everything else is
>speculation.

Something you need to understand about this relationship.
Richard Heyser worked as a scientist for the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory. He did NOT do loudspeaker design or research there.
If someone worked for him, it was not to do loudspeaker
research. If discussions about loudspeakers came up at the
office, it was in the form of casual discussions, not formal
job-related discussions.

Also, if we consider the work that Mr. Heyser did on
loudspeakers by looking at what he published, it was not on
loudspeaker design per se, but rather on the nature of signals,
their behavior in going through systems such as loudspeakers,
and on measurement principles. Heyser never, to the best of my
knowledged, designed a spaker system that saw commercial
implementation.

That being said, the work that he DID do was brilliant, forward
thinking and innovative. It just wasn't on practical loudspeaker
design.

This is not to denigrate either the late and very great Dr.
Heyser NOR is it to denigrate von Schweikert. If simply is to
point out that "trained under Heyser" may well have absolutely
NOTHING to do with loudspeakers. Personally, I do not know what
he trained under Heyser as, I have never asked, I have never
been told.

--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| |

[Jason Kau]

Richard D Pierce > wrote:
> Something you need to understand about this relationship.
> Richard Heyser worked as a scientist for the Jet Propulsion
> Laboratory. He did NOT do loudspeaker design or research there.
> If someone worked for him, it was not to do loudspeaker
> research. If discussions about loudspeakers came up at the
> office, it was in the form of casual discussions, not formal
> job-related discussions.

Something that always struck me as "questionable" about Von Schweikert's
credentials is this line from his biography:

http://www.vonschweikert.com/about/history.htm

"Early success in designing concert PA systems for his band and others,
led Albert back to the academic world to hone his technical skills in
speaker design. Engineering studies at Georgia State University and
practical lab work at the California Institute of Technology fulfilled
Albert's desire to combine technical knowledge with his passion for
music."

Georgia State University? As far as I know or can find out, GSU has never
had a engineering program. If it did, it was certainly a very minor or
basic program--offered by a tier 4 school. I find it very doubtful that
the University System of Georgia would have allowed GSU engineering
programs when Georgia Tech is just a couple of miles away! Computer
Science, yes. Engineering, no.

--
Jason Kau
http://www.cnd.gatech.edu/~jkau

[TonyP]

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 03:08:26 GMT, TonyP > wrote:
>
>
>>I have read the "wars" between he and Dunlavy along with all
>>the "stuff" that went on when Schweikert's place in upstate NY got
>>flooded or something like that. And how he went out of business. Now, he
>>is back in business (for better or worse). His use of "techno-speak"
>>eludes my primitive brain, and I wouldn't know if what he is saying is
>>accurate or not. I leave that to the much more technically educated to
>>decide. What I do is listen to music. And I enjoy it.
>
>
> War is something that occurs between opponents who are at least
> roughly matched in ability. The Dunlavy/Schweikert affair was a
> slaughter more reminiscent of 'Desert Storm'......................

It most definitely appeared that way. Again, I respect Dunlavy and what
he has produced. If he put it together in a garage, it would not have
mattered to me (since it seems that a lot of "hi-end" audio equipment
started that way). Schweikert's achievement with the VR4's "speak" for
themselves. How he achieved this product (and others), for me, doesn't
really matter to me either. As long as it does what it was intended to
do, THAT is what matters to me.
BTW.... anyone familiar with MBL CD players?