New PS Audio speakers?

Paul,
Maybe external is not the way to go. There’s pro’s and con’s for both ext and int and I would probably lean towards internal myself, especially since it’s simpler and keeps costs and cable count down…

So let’s stick to internal…but…follow me here…let’s assume a few things:

  1. Same 12" driver in all three models.
  2. Same internal volume of closed bass box in all three models.
  3. Cut-out/space big enough for 1.2 kW plate-amp in all three models.

Then make three different plate-amps as you already planned, 350, 700 and 1200 W.
Let customer choose which one he want’s or can afford…maybe he could start with a 350 W in the AN3, maybe that’s all he (me…) can afford if u land on the projected $6000…
Then maybe he can upgrade plate-amp when funds allow…you are always into upgrades/trade-ins, right…?
Or he can order the AN3/1.2 kW at once since he prefer the smaller AN3 but want’s the bass as good as it gets, and can afford the extra cost…??

I think we solved it for you now, Paul…what you think…:wink:

As with all manufacturing, multiple options = increased complexity = increased cost across the board.

I think this is a really good idea.

2 Likes

Since you like modular ideas Paul, too bad you didn’t take the suggestion to make the headphone stage of the BHK Preamp module.

My biggest agreement! A few hundred $ spent without meaning for many I guess.

Paul’s being so completely open with his designs and taking input from us seriously, so I feel reproaching him for a past design choice doesn’t seem right.

I have a question about the plate amp.

Will the woofer inputs be Speaker level and line level as well?

Will speaker level cabling be internal or external?

PS Audio still makes and could still change the BHK Preamp for the benefit of future customers. It’s fair game.

Everyone has a right to an opinion and based on how much of their equipment I own I would suppose they should be very interested in mine…PS Audio DMP, DS DAC, BHK Pre, BHK 300s, P20, Power Ports (2), & Noise Harvesters (5). Previously owned a PWT, BHK 250, P10 & Dectet.

Finally, the modular amp approach seems like a waste to me. Neither the design of sliding amps in-n-out will be that slick, not every amp will be perfectly suited to each speaker design and PS Audio already has a generious upgrade program.

Ready to buy the AN2s, Norton

I am not sure I see the connection here. I am neither for nor against modular. Each use case is completely different and has to be thought of in that light. In the case of the BHK it made more sense to include the headphone amplifier inside the unit and I think that decision remains a good one.

They will and should if driver and box size is the same. Microphone will take care of level matching to AMT/ribbons.

Agreed Paul for Customers who use headphones. What percent of BHK Preamp owners do?

The Sprout started out without a remote, Sprout 2 has a remote, correct. Having had a LFD integrated without a remote, saw that change coming! No matter how good the LFD sounded it was a pain.

Back to the BHK preamp, from a buyers point of view,not a fan of buying kit I’ll never use. If a majority of your BHK Preamp buyers have and use headphones with their preamps, it is what it is. If the rest of us are subsidizing a minority, perhaps the approach should change.

Fair enough and a modular approach when viewed from the customer’s perspective makes perfect sense. However, as viewed from the manufacturer’s standpoint it’s a royal nightmare, one you should be familiar with. We have to figure out months in advance how many of any product is going to likely be made and in what color and in what voltage. Dealers and distributors have these sometimes in their inventory and sometimes not. We have them in our finished goods on occasion and they are double boxed, inspected, serialized, and ready to go. Oh, now the customer wants a headphone module installed. Unbox, add the module, throw away the box, retest, re-serialize, re-box. Or, make it like the Bridge and have the customer do the install and then add another customer service person to accommodate the questions and problems.

Unfortunately we just haven’t found a way to do this with ease and in a way that serves our customers easily and our production capabilities efficiently.

Totally agreed and do understand Paul! Hence my quote about modular skeakers previously.

Guessing then, based on your comments, if you guys proceed with modular speakers you would or sell or at least package the amps separate from the speakers to avoid your fore mentioned changes?

Well…I don’t see why the amps should be packaged separately…the speakers should come ready to plug in and play, right?
And I don’t see any problem with giving the customer the choice to pick the “right” plate-amp for his speaker based on his needs/system/room. Just like the already mentioned options for different side panels to fit his taste and interior.

So when the speakers eventually come up on the site ready to order, the buyer will have two drop-down menus. One where he chooses side panel trim, another where he chooses amplifier. After selected, the order goes to the builder, who finishes and packs up the speaker to the buyers specification.

Increased cost? Sure, as opposed to only offering ONE side panel trim and ONE amplifier for each model. But the different side panels will happen anyway, and there will be different amps made, according to Paul’s previous posts.

But…

Paul, I actually still hope you scrap the 350 and 700W, and go for reference bass in all three models. And I still claim class D is cheap…:wink:
With the 1.2 kW in all three models, you SAVE money on development, manufacturing, logistics, inventory, complexity etc…and the drop-down menu for selecting amps can be scrapped all together.
So while the 1.2 kW would cost a few bucks more, I still think that should be the ONLY amp and would be the best way to go. Both for PSAudio and for the buyer.

As someone who is certainly not as technically adept as many of the regular posters in these forums I thought I should present what I see as the flip side of the coin to many of the ideas I see suggested in this thread.

With the ever increasing complexity of some of the layouts I see it’s important to remember that ultimately the final product has to be something the customer understands. With too many optional layouts you’re likely to run into customer confusion as to what set of options is best. This unfortunately ends up driving the purchaser away towards a simpler decision.

IMO the good thing in the idea to provide the bigger bass modules also for the smaller speakers is, that there will be people with money available but not that much space who still want best sound at the given size. So it’s not always true that those with the money available buy the bigger speakers.

1 Like

I wasn’t directing my comment at anyone in particular but your point is well taken.

Paul,
I loved the renderings of the PSA speakers. Thank you for the screen savers.
From a pure aesthetic approach, I would like to see two tweets placed next to the AMT ribbon. In the latest image of the speaker, placement is too vertical for my eyes. An additional benefit, would be that the AN3 would repeat the look of the AN2 & AN1.
I too want to pre-order.

Thanks. We’re working now on skinnying them up so they are more narrow. This means moving the 12” to be side firing. We can model this and see if it is better overall. Speakers are always a trade off. The narrow baffle helps with the kids and highs and the front firing woofer is preferred to a side firing one. But, the trade off may be worth it if we keep the maximum subwoofer frequency well below 100Hz where the woofer’s not directional. Still playing.

I think in the AN3 it’s important the single tweeter is at a seated ear level which is why you see it where it is.

1 Like

Wow that’s great news optically!

Paul, I am honored to hear from you. I am confident you and PSA will build a beautiful work of art. I truly value and enjoy reading PSA forum topics.