Best dome tweeter? (1 Viewer)

[Sam A]

"Flat response alone DOES NOT guarantee a good sounding speaker. " [given anehoic conditions]

i disagree, what else besides sonic signature will tell you how a speaker sounds? wood stain?

 

[ScottCHI]

the response curve is but one characteristic of a speaker. there are several other characteristics of speakers that contribute to their sound. the crossover. the drivers' materials. the cabinet's construction. the cabinet's material. etc. etc. you could go on and on. there are a myriad of things besides the frequency response curve that will dictate the sound of a speaker.

you could make a contraption that had a perfectly flat response curve form 30-30,000 yet sound like absolute crap when actual music is pumped through it.

you could have two speakers with identically flat response curves. one is a sealed 3-way with a 10" butyl rubber woofer a 3" kevlar midrange and a 1.25" silk dome tweeter. the other is ported with a 6.5" aluminum woofer and a 1" titanium tweeter. do you think they'll sound different with your favorite cd?

reproducing music is a lot different than test tones and sine waves.

 

[Blkout]

People focus too much on a flat response curve, little do most people know, the human ear VERY RARELY likes a flat frequency response. Being a car audio competitor for the last few years, we have to optimize our cars on a RTA to try to get the flattest response possible for one part of the judging, but me and almost all other competitors have different EQ settings so that they can use one setting for RTA and one for music. The reason is that a flat frequency response just doesn't sound that good to msot people. Often sounding very dull and lifeless.


Never judge a tweeter based on response curves or tweeter material, the only way to judge a tweeter is to listen to it with your own ears. I've heard metal domes that could pass for soft domes and I've heard soft domes that sounded like metal. It all depends on the quality of the tweeter, the X-over settings, and how the tweeter is implemented in the rest of the system. A cheap soft dome is going to sound bad, a cheap hard dome is going to sound bad, tweeter material makes no difference in this case, its really just a matter of how good the actual tweeter is, not what its made of.

 

[JamesCB]

From Phase Technology:



IMO, Phase Tech produces one of the most natural sounding and accurate soft-domes available.

James

 

[Mark Seaton]

As John mentioned, the crossover and integration with the accompanying drivers are by far the most important part. There are certainly some bad performing tweeters, but a very good designer will be able to make $25 in parts sound better than a novice spending $250 on drivers.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly encourage interested DIYers to build, experiment, and most importantly, measure after they listen. Fact is though, unless you know the crossover design, components and all related details, you need to be cautious of generalizations. Also realize there are some pretty mediocre designs for sale out there, and indeed, a competent and persistent DIYer can better many offerings. Believe me, I've seen/heard some wonderful components made to sound awful, and some very cheap components sound wonderful.

Cheers,

 

[MikeDuke]

Blkout


I have to agree with that. After JM Labs everything, IMHO is second string. Don't forget their beryllium tweeter. Very nice.
Mike D

 

[ScottCHI]

hehehe

Jeff_Wi, i think you get the gist, eh?

 

[Sam A]

scott I agree that an electrostatic tweeters sound different than cone tweeters which sound different than horn tweeters which sound different than dome tweeters.

now can you explain the pros/cons per each?

like Ive read horns can be shrill sounding but ppl love klipsch.

 

[John Garcia]

I am not a fan of horn loaded tweeters, but they are just like any other tweeter - there are good ones and bad ones. You can have horn loaded soft domes too. Not all horns are harsh, but to me, Klipsch are. Great dispersion, good midrange, but their highs end up being too bright for my taste. Some people like that ear blistering crispness, but I don't.

 

[ScottCHI]

other than the obvious, no

the only 2 generalizations i'd make are:

electrostatics are very delicate, physically

and

people either love or hate klipsch

 

[Sam A]

"but i seriously doubt you could tell a tweeter's material or construction in a blinded test. not on a well-designed speaker, anyway."

which do you agree that a well designed speaker had generally a flatter response than those in whioch you could tell a difference between the speakers?

 

[Phil Iturralde]

Phil

 

[ScottCHI]

now, which one do you like, phil?

 

[ScottCHI]

i'm sorry. could you rephrase that?

 

[Sam A]

Scott, we have 2 groups of speakers, ones that you consider well designed, and a group that isnt. would you say the ones that you could not differentiate between tweeter types, had a flatter FR than those that you could distinguish the tweeter types?

 

[ScottCHI]

would i say that? hmmmm?

no. but i won't deny it either. the last part may or may not be true. quite a specific statement.

but what do the 2 initial groups have to do with the query? are you inferring that the speakers that i "consider well designed" have the flatter FR? or not?

 

[Robert_Dufresne]

OK one last time

1- The ultimate speaker would be one that is able to reproduce a sound so faithfully that you couldn't tell if you were listening to the speaker or the live source.

2- If you agree with number 1, than you must agree that the only way to evaluate a speaker is by comparing the sound it produces to the source matérial.

3- Such a comparison has nothing to do with personal preferences.

This is fun !!

 

[Sam A]

"are you inferring that the speakers that i "consider well designed" have the flatter FR? or not? " that was my question to you Scott.

 

[John Garcia]

People still like BOSE cubes - no tweeter at all. It's very much a personal preference and experience; how much has one been exposed to in order to make a comparison. A speaker with a flat response should sound better than one with peaks/dips, however the point I think Scott and I were both trying to make was that this alone does not guarantee a perfect speaker, because the way a speaker actually sounds is perceived differently by each person, and each has an opinion about how something should sound.

How about electronic music? There is no live performance to compare it to, it's completely manufactured. How a particular speaker reproduces that sound can be quite different, and I use some specific electronic music to audition sometimes, because it readily reveals to me the midrange and high frequency characteristics of a speaker to me.

BTW, my speakers are +/- 1.2dB across their range, right up there with the flattest I've ever seen/heard. Nearfield studio monitors are typically around +/-1.5dB or better.

 

[ScottCHI]

robert, i admire your idealism, but what you describe doesn't exist. sorry.