Is it the only way just to open the wholes to the speaker ? You created a face, then delete it, add the holes, fill surroindings one by one, then try to close the whole face again. This does not look like the optimal way to just open couple of holes on a face. Is there any way to just open that holes directly on the face without spending 20 min to delete and fill again with extra 40 lines?
Not really, that's how modeling goes. Perhaps it's like saying that building a house takes too much effort, all the cement and mixing, wooding, the drilling, the hammering, painting, etc. That's just how building a house goes. When modeling correctly you build your geometry around where the loops flow as they should and you fill that up quad by quad, almost like a puzzle. You can model with booleans and Ngons and triangles of course, but then you'd have an uncontrollable mess. But don't worry, you get used to it all.
I am not saying like house takes too much effort, i guess your answer is a bit weird way to explain. Let me explain in your way: It is more like he is trying to build the house with single piece of stones (in term: Masonry Structure) and i am saying there should be easier or closer way like just making with concrete instead of putting each stone one by one. That is why your example has nothing to do with what i am asking. I am beginner in this software, not in 3D and this way is the longest ways i have ever seen in between all the softwares i am using.
My question is more like: Can not we add the circles first as objects, then cut out the parts which intersect with the speaker surface. or placing the circles on the speaker's surface then insert-move down. I hope this explains better than my first comment. If this is the only way, of course i will try to get used to it but i am looking for a reasonable example or answer.
Ah nice, a fellow analogy constructor. I too like to speak in analogies. To answer your question, yes you can model in various ways, you can have each part be its own object or you can model inside a single object. What I typically like to do is model according to the real world. So if I'm modeling a door, the single piece of wood would be one object, the door handle would be a separate object, the hinges separates objects, and so forth.
Also when you are modeling a single object that has lots of intricate parts, usually you have to build up the shape, so in our analogy, it would be stone by stone yes. You start of with basic primitives and you have to shape them to the way you need them and usually that is quad by quad.
But keep watching courses and tutorials, you'll see the workflows and see the different ways people make things. Mostly it rewires your brain to think how you would model something, the approaches are not like you would make sense of things in real life, since modeling has constraints by its own nature.
As with almost everything in Blender there are a number of ways to get the same result. However, each comes with its own set of potential issues. For instance, you could use a boolean operation to cut out the holes (probably what I would have tried first) but there's likely to be a good bit of clean up involved afterwards so it might just be a trade off.
Like Omar mentioned, keep watching the courses and you'll see a variety of methods. Over time you'll find methods that click with your personal workflow.
No this isn't the only way. As already pointed out there's knife projected. You can also do circle as separate objects then give them thickness and use a Boolean modifier. This can lead to some clean up. There's instancing on faces/vertices method. There is also the tissue addon that comes with blender. You can also build it using geometry nodes. In this video he goes for the method that is easy and has the most consistent outcome.
