What is the history behind yourself and audio?

I’ve been an avid electronics DIY ’er ever since I can remember.  Music hooked me at a young age too.  Music is one of the very few legal drugs.  Music helped point me in the direction of a career in electronics industry.  I learned to play the acoustic guitar when I was young too.  Even since then, I’ve been trying to artificially, but with some success; reproduce the live sound of my favorite guitar in my home.

What is the history behind Gilmore?

A few years back, Harry Blazer came to visit and listened to an early prototype, which evolved into what is now our Model 2 speaker.  He believed they held great promise, so a great partnership was born that day.

What else are you involved in?

I was doing digital design and network engineering for major aerospace companies.  Most recently, I was involved with a state-of-the art electronics contract manufacturing company and a well know high-end amplifier manufacturer.  Now I’m concentrating exclusively on my efforts with Gilmore Audio.

What is your idea of what a speaker should sound like, or for that matter not sound like? I ask this because the speakers are not what one would refer to as “typical.”

Thank you for your astute observations.  You’r e right.  My speakers are unlike any others.  A good speaker should not have an obvious sound of its own.  That must be primary, if the goal is to reproduce the live event.

Designing a speaker to conform to a particular type of music makes no sense to me.  A good speaker should handle any source you can throw at it and not be optimized for any particular musical genre.  I think of a speaker more like how others think of a well-designed “accurate” amplifier.  It should simply pass on the source without change.  A speaker needs to do an electrical to mechanical translation, so its job is infinitely more difficult.  This is where creativity and state-of-the-art materials come into play.

When you design, where do you start? Or is it all one happy “balancing” act or more an issue of trade-offs?

I don’t consider myself a speaker designer.  I’ve studied the popular speaker design texts and found them useful only as a reference.  In my mind, the more classic speaker design methodology stifles creativity and dooms us to repeating the unsatisfactory results of the past.  This results in repeating the past, with only slight sonic advancement.  This approach will not get any closer to reproducing the live event any time soon.   

When I devised the concept for my speakers, I did borrow heavily from the past efforts of companies like Apogee, Carver and even Sound Labs to some extent.  I’ve always believed these companies brought me closer to the live musical event than most all others.  I’ve always believed that the line-source dipole provides a presentation that is much more like what I hear in a live performance too.

I believe the best way to design a speaker is to go back to the basics that physics teaches us.  Physics allows us to visualize the perfect loudspeaker, which of course can’t possibly exist, again due the limitations of physics.  Physics is our best friend and also our worst enemy.

So, if we try to visualize the perfect loudspeaker we have some of the following characteristics:

• No mass
• No resonances
• Perfect 360 degree dispersion
• Infinite dynamic range
• Flat frequency response from DC to light
• 100% efficient
• No room interaction
• No distortion products
• Purely resistive load

Now the trick is to find creative ways to approach each of these design ideals, within the limits of real-world physics and our available technology.  Simple goal – right?

Do you consider a price point or is it more of a “now what can I reasonably sell this thing for” approach?

Truth is, I don’t think about a price point very much.  I’ve tried my best to do an all out assault on the state-of-the art in a given speaker model.  I don’t give much thought to any design or production compromises that might be consistent with a “price point” or what might be considered a “reasonable price point”.  These ideas don’t mean much when the goal is to produce a product that reflects the best I can do.  Once the design is done, the bill of materials is examined and then reality hits hard.  A price is chosen to remain profitable and then I c an only hope the results are affordable.  High-end loudspeakers are not meant to be affordable.  This goes with the territory when you’re trying to make a state-of-the-art product. 

How does a product come about? Can you trace its beginnings from just a twinkle in your eye to that ready to be sold?

The “twinkle” came about 12 years ago.  This is when I started getting very serious selecting a speaker that could get me as close as possible to the live musical event in my living room. I was looking for a speaker that I could live with.  It was all about compromises, especially back then.  I quickly learned that my goal would never be realized.  Although there were some relatively fine speakers sold 12 years ago, every one of them had some serious performance compromises.  This is  why I was attracted to the Apogee, Carver and Sound Labs offerings at the time.  Although I believe these speakers had a long way to go, they seemed to have the fewest compromises to my ears.  They each held great promise, and could bring me closer to my music, but would not allow them me realize my sonic goals or holy grail.

12 years ago, I had no intension of building my own speakers, but since I couldn’t find anything that floated my sonic boat, so I started modifying Apogee and Carver speakers.  These efforts taught me a great deal and sent me on my way.  So, I set out doing my best to optimize these speakers based on the limitations of physics we discussed earlier. 

Can you tell me more about the speakers (drivers, crossovers, etc.)?

We hand-build all of our drivers.  I’ve not yet found any off-the-shelf sources that can provide what we need.  Also, I’ve not yet found a source that can build our drivers to our specifications.  Our ribbon is purely resistive in the audio spectrum.  Its mass is much lower than any other planar-magnetic driver out there.  Its dynamic range is well past any other as well.  It uses a proprietary conductor that is far stronger than what is used in other planar-magnetics. Our woofers exhibit distortion levels at least 10 dB lower than competing drivers.  Our ribbon and woofer compression points are extremely high, which yields very low distortion at real-world listening levels.

I tried my best to use wood, or some composite/wood materials, to reduce cost and weight.  I was never successful because in-band resonances were always an issue.  Once I gave up and went with Corian, the resonance issue was a thing of the past, albeit at a much higher cost.  As is most always the case, the level of performance I craved did no t come without higher cost.

Our crossover was ultimately installed in a box separate from the speaker panels.  This was because I couldn’t find a practical method to stop resonances within in the crossover enclosure when it was panel mounted.  Our crossover is a two-way, 4th order Linkwitz-Reiley design.  It uses only the best components and also very low DC resistance air-core inductors.  A single Model 2 crossover weighs 34 pounds.

All the speaker’s components can be replaced in the field, so future upgrades can be accomplished in the home by the owner.

What is your choice in music? That is, do you have a reference that you use in designing your products? Rock, jazz, classical?

I like most all kinds of music, except for Country & Western, Rap, Hip-Hop and Easy Listening.  I’m equally at home with a Bach pipe organ fugue, symphonic music, heavy-metal, industrial or even Kraftwerke.  I like to push a system to its limits, since that’s what I hear during a live event.  Our greatest problem today is the very poor choice of recorded music.  There’s good stuff out there, but it’s in the minority.  Even the best digital sources seem to have real limitations.

What do you see as something that separates Gilmor e from the rest of the companies out there?

Perhaps is much like Apple said so many years ago.  “We think different”.  Now please understand I don’t own any Apple products.  I’d be happy if the world ran on UNIX.  You see, I really do think different.   Perhaps it is because I was born in Berkeley.  If it’s mainstream, I run the other way.  Since no other speaker technology brings me close enough to the live musical event, I typically reject what’s been done in the past and do my best to start fresh.

Is there any speaker out there that makes you think, “Gee now that is a really nice speaker.”

You do like to ask the difficult questions!  I wish I could give you a good answer.  I can, however, talk all around your question hoping it will go away.  I’ve never found a dynamic speaker system or speaker driver that I like.  I believe this is due mostly to too much mass, poor dispersion characteristics and unwanted resonances.  This eliminates all but about 10% of what I’d call a speaker companies that have potential.  I’ve already expressed my preference for line-source dipoles, since they come closer to the dispersion I hear at a live event.  There are some “nice” speakers remaining, but every one of them exhibits severe resonance problems, poor dynamic range and too much distortion.  So, did I avoid answering this question well?

You seem rather humble and quite “human,” whereas many designers see themselves as a cut above the rest of us mere mortals. I have spoken to too many who find nothing and no one equal to their designs and products.

Dave, you are too kind.  I don’t know about this mere mortal stuff.  It seems to me this is what keeps us all humble.  No matter how hard I try, or how much time I spend, it seems my efforts are nothing more than a work in progress.  There’s always so much more to do and so much more to discover.  There are many more mistakes to be made before real improvements are realized.

What is next in line for Gilmore?

I’m working on the Model 4 prototypes now.  This is a monitor/bookshelf design that has been a real challenge.  It’s not been easy to scale down out technology into a 30” high speaker.  I also have a Model 1 on a back burner.  This is the cost-is-no-object monster that will not even fit in my real-world living room.  Still, I must revisit this effort some day soon, just to see what can be done.  It will be our flagship some day.

I’m also working on some very unique and unusual electronics.  Much like the design goals behind the speakers, I’ve always wanted an amp and preamp that could take the best advantage of the speaker’s capability.  I’m not quite ready to divulge what I’m doing in this arena quite yet, but you can be sure it’s something very different, much like the speaker project.

Where do you see the future of high-end audio being in the next, 10 to 20 years? Will our children be after the same things we are today?

My crystal ball is very dusty, but I’ll see what I can do.  I believe, and sincerely hope, that there will always be a niche for the state-of-the-art reproduction of the live musical event.  This is my primary push and my motivation.  I hope I will never see the rug pulled out from und er my first love.

Still, I can’t ignore the marketing machine behind home theater and portable electronics, such as the MP-3 players and the like.  Although I’m convinced that the whole concept behind using a home theater system to reproduce music is critically flawed, I can’t deny that a good HT system can be great fun for watching movies.  Perhaps it’s these portable players that will keep two-channel sources alive in the years to come.  I must admit, I’ve hooked up one of the more popular players, to my reference system, and been amazed how well they perform at their highest data rate.  I’ve also heard that our speakers perform very well in HT applications.

Will our children still be after the same things we are today?  Yes, I think so, at least at some level.  For me, music comes first.  It was playing my favorite instrument that started this whole “audiophile” thing.  I’m convinced that future generations will always be hooked on playing music and the wonder of the live event.  I’m convinced our best neural research scientists are right.  The basic need for music is genetically programmed into our brains.  I’m greatly encouraged by the kids in my neighborhood.  They all tell me that they attach themselves to their portable players because they love musi c.  Some of these kids play an instrument of some kind. This is our future.

Thank you for the opportunity to answer your questions, Dave.  I enjoyed the opportunity.