Surpassing Expectations: Pioneer's Andrew Jones

Stereophile

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Messages
442
<p><img class="story_image" src="http://www.stereophile.com/images/AndrewJones2.jpg" /></p> In our September issue, I wrote about <a href="http://www.stereophile.com/content/entry-level-33">Pioneer’s excellent SP-BS22-LR loudspeaker</a>. At just $129.99/pair (and often discounted), the SP-BS22-LR represents extraordinary value and may very well attract a wider and younger audience to true high-fidelity sound. The only thing I don’t really like about the speaker is its tongue-twister of a name. (But that’s easy to forgive. Most people can’t pronounce my name, either.)
<p>
While preparing the review, I took the opportunity to ask Andrew Jones, Pioneer’s chief engineer, a few questions about hi-fi, music, and loudspeaker design. As always, Jones was forthright and charming; his answers to my questions were often enlightening.
</p><p>
<b>Stephen Mejias:</b> In the July issue of <i>Stereophile</i>, two of your loudspeakers were reviewed: the <a href="http://www.stereophile.com/content/tad-evolution-one-loudspeaker">$29,800/pair TAD Evolution One</a> and the <a href="http://www.stereophile.com/content/pioneer-sp-bs22-lr-loudspeaker">$129.99/pair Pioneer SP-BS22-LR</a>. It’s not entirely uncommon to find two products designed by the same person in any issue of <i>Stereophile</i>, but I doubt we’ve ever reviewed in one issue two products by the same designer that have had such radically different prices. How do you feel about that? Do you take more pride or happiness in one design over the other?
</p><p>
<b>Andrew Jones:</b> I feel great about that! I remember when I started the design of the original versions, the BS21, that I thought it would be fun to design a true entry-level speaker that would perform to such a surprising degree that it would excite first-comers into hi-fi and inspire them to get more interested in their music and our hobby. Kal Rubinson was the first person to be surprised at their performance level when he heard them at CEDIA over two years ago. The BS22 are an evolution from the BS21, and allowed me to take the designs even further. They also take me full circle: Back when I was at KEF, the first design I did after moving from research into product development was an entry level speaker (the C45, I seem to recall), so now after 25 years or so I’m back at square one!
</p><p>
To design these speakers at the same time as designing almost cost-no-object speakers is particularly satisfying. Each has its own design challenges and subsequent satisfaction when completed, but the great thing is that lots of people can afford the entry level Pioneers and don’t have to feel disenfranchised because hi-fi has become too expensive.
</p><p>
<span class="h1">"The great thing is that lots of people can afford the entry level Pioneers and don’t have to feel disenfranchised because hi-fi has become too expensive."</span>
</p><p>
<b>SM:</b> Can you explain the differences in designing a cost-no-object speaker and an entry-level speaker like the Pioneer? What are the different challenges? What are the different rewards? Do you have more fun designing a cost-no-object speaker or a very affordable speaker?
</p><p>
<b>AJ:</b> In truth, even a cost-no-object speaker has some cost objective, otherwise, as an engineer, one would never stop and never get the design to market! It’s just that the cost objectives are different and so the design decisions are different.
</p><p>
In an affordable speaker, every cent spent has to be evaluated in terms of its contribution to sound quality. In particular one is looking at what decisions can be made that have no cost implication. A good example of this would be cone and surround profile on the bass cone. Time spent in evaluating this aspect of the design has great rewards, because it has influence on the requirements for the crossover network, integration to the tweeter and overall smoothness of the response, both on- and off-axis.
</p><p>
It is surprising what kind of decisions have an influence over how good the design will sound, because of where one can free up cost to put towards performance. Although not a secret in the industry, one interesting aspect is the choice of cabinet/packaging/carton size: Shaving a few millimeters off of the size makes a difference to how many will fit in the shipping container. An exact fit will reduce wasted space and reduce shipping cost. Maybe only a few cents per speaker, but this can then be spent on performance by adding perhaps more absorption, or a better spec capacitor in the crossover, etc.
</p><p>In this video, Andrew Jones describes some of the technology behind Pioneer's SP-BS22-LR loudspeaker.</p>
<p>
At the other end of the scale, the challenge is in looking to see what hasn’t been tried yet, what is waiting to be discovered, understood and then exploited. It is more research- than development-oriented, with longer time scales to allow for explorations that might not work out, at least for now. The reward is just as great, but shared by fewer.
</p><p>
Engineering is a game of challenging the rules while at the same time being bound by them. The rules are different for the two cost objectives, but they are equally challenging and equally fun. Of course, the reaction from friends and colleagues can be equally fun, ranging from, “<i>Wow, only $30,000!</i>” to “<i>Really, $30,000?!</i>”
</p><p>
<span class="h1">"Engineering is a game of challenging the rules while at the same time being bound by them."</span>
</p><p>
<b>SM:</b> How did you first become interested in music? In hi-fi? In speaker design?
</p><p>
<b>AJ:</b> My interest in music came from the gift of a Dansette record player: Changer, tube amplifier, and speaker

[Source: http://www.stereophile.com/content/surpassing-expectations-pioneers-andrew-jones]
 
Back
Top