Viva La Tradeoff!
Indeed, a high-ish XO point between dome mid/(quasi-"super")tweeter relative to CTC spacing is arguably best executed with rather steep FIR slopes (and optimally corresponding pre-ringing mitigation) via DSP/active in order to lessen/eliminate the otherwise invariable pronounced lobing/interference mess (while also increasing power handling/output capacity, and allowing for more precise phase correction, EQing etc.).
That obviously translates to considerably more complexity/expense; so yes, mating an excellent/potent 5" to a - de-facto - robust-bottom-end tweeter @1-1.5 is undoubtedly a more readily accessible path to quite satisfactory performance, and proportionately far more "bang for the buck"...
As for ATC cravings, some years back I had the pleasure of working with its "poorer cousin", the since-discontinued 3" Tang Band dome - quite low distortion, sufficiently resolving to put the magnifying glass over the rather amusing gamut of "idiosyncrasies"/more or less gross inconsistencies in recording approaches, but, with well-miced/minimally processed source material, most importantly simply tonally correct/"convincing", even if not quite as dynamic and high-output as the (apparently harder and harder to procure?) S Version of the ATC.
It'll be interesting to see what SB Acoustics will come up with - hopefully it'll sport a more compact overall outer dimension relative to its diaphragm diameter a la MDM55...
Enjoy!
Indeed, a high-ish XO point between dome mid/(quasi-"super")tweeter relative to CTC spacing is arguably best executed with rather steep FIR slopes (and optimally corresponding pre-ringing mitigation) via DSP/active in order to lessen/eliminate the otherwise invariable pronounced lobing/interference mess (while also increasing power handling/output capacity, and allowing for more precise phase correction, EQing etc.).
That obviously translates to considerably more complexity/expense; so yes, mating an excellent/potent 5" to a - de-facto - robust-bottom-end tweeter @1-1.5 is undoubtedly a more readily accessible path to quite satisfactory performance, and proportionately far more "bang for the buck"...
As for ATC cravings, some years back I had the pleasure of working with its "poorer cousin", the since-discontinued 3" Tang Band dome - quite low distortion, sufficiently resolving to put the magnifying glass over the rather amusing gamut of "idiosyncrasies"/more or less gross inconsistencies in recording approaches, but, with well-miced/minimally processed source material, most importantly simply tonally correct/"convincing", even if not quite as dynamic and high-output as the (apparently harder and harder to procure?) S Version of the ATC.
It'll be interesting to see what SB Acoustics will come up with - hopefully it'll sport a more compact overall outer dimension relative to its diaphragm diameter a la MDM55...
Enjoy!
One of the reasons the ATC dome is good is its motor linearity allowing larger moves. The problem with this is you need a huge magnet and refined pole design to get that much linear travel from small light a voice coil that large in diameter.
I supose a neo magnet would reduce that magnet size BUT you still going to be into a rather big neo AND you still need more expensive pole structures than typical simpler motor designs that make up the more practical and cheaper units.
A really good large dome ( ie long travel and linear to use down to 300 hz and no breakup to at least 5 khz) is probably always going to be expensive.
I supose a neo magnet would reduce that magnet size BUT you still going to be into a rather big neo AND you still need more expensive pole structures than typical simpler motor designs that make up the more practical and cheaper units.
A really good large dome ( ie long travel and linear to use down to 300 hz and no breakup to at least 5 khz) is probably always going to be expensive.
I love domes, properly used will yield a great sound. I have about 4 speaker systems utilizing some domes. Here is 4-way I just finished working on crossover. Absolutely happy about the result. I have not moved it downstairs to compare to the main system yet, but I can live with this sound.
Attachments
Anyone see this?
Morel TM4055-8 2" Midrange and 1-1/8" Tweeter Speaker Plate
It was hard to find and doesn't turn up in Parts express' awful search feature, but its a mid dome and tweeter combined into one. I'm a bit surprised though they didn't use a smaller tweeter?
Dome mids make sense to bridge the gap between a typical 5 or 6" woofer and something like a 3/4 tweeter or ribbon. High dispersion gives a more ambient sound that maybe desirable in some situations.
But trying to design a passive crossover for something like that would be a chore, and one would want very steep slopes up top to prevent lobing.
If you use a PC based active system (equalizer APO is free) or something like a mini dsp such a set up is easy.
Morel TM4055-8 2" Midrange and 1-1/8" Tweeter Speaker Plate
It was hard to find and doesn't turn up in Parts express' awful search feature, but its a mid dome and tweeter combined into one. I'm a bit surprised though they didn't use a smaller tweeter?
Dome mids make sense to bridge the gap between a typical 5 or 6" woofer and something like a 3/4 tweeter or ribbon. High dispersion gives a more ambient sound that maybe desirable in some situations.
But trying to design a passive crossover for something like that would be a chore, and one would want very steep slopes up top to prevent lobing.
If you use a PC based active system (equalizer APO is free) or something like a mini dsp such a set up is easy.
Morel doesn't make a 22mm tweeter or ribbon. I also disagree that this would take steep slopes as a necessity. That is pure conjecture, and likely wrong.
I used the HiVi derivative, and came out with 12dB electrical slopes. I'm pretty sure the Morel plate will be able to achieve the same objective.
Later,
Wolf
I used the HiVi derivative, and came out with 12dB electrical slopes. I'm pretty sure the Morel plate will be able to achieve the same objective.
Later,
Wolf
Its not conjecture. Let's take a typical ribbon which needs to be crossed at over 3000 hz and then a typical dome mid which often have a large face and you are already having significant output at a distance greater than the wavelength, which would create lobing that would be noticable to many people.
Last edited:
I say this in a friendly way, 33Pollhigh, but lobing above and below axis is caused by the typical Butterworth solutions that use 90 degree phase alignment to work their own power-flat magic. It shouldn't be an issue in phase aligned designs. The lobe is horizontal, whatever the order of the filter.
And MTTM can fix this with Butterworth:
My own experience with soft domes is they work better with steep filters. They have inherent problems with Fs resonance and the lack of spider and an uncontrolled central breakup that is best unprovoked. The 1 1/8" Morel CAT298 sounds terrible on second order to me, but is a pleasure on 4th order:
Troels is driven to 4th order with his dome midrange design too. Partly for pahse alignment, IMO. SP38/13
I'd love to hear that one. Must be good!
And MTTM can fix this with Butterworth:
My own experience with soft domes is they work better with steep filters. They have inherent problems with Fs resonance and the lack of spider and an uncontrolled central breakup that is best unprovoked. The 1 1/8" Morel CAT298 sounds terrible on second order to me, but is a pleasure on 4th order:
Troels is driven to 4th order with his dome midrange design too. Partly for pahse alignment, IMO. SP38/13
I'd love to hear that one. Must be good!
Morel don't vary their tweeter domes much. Always 1 1/8". Ferrofluid too.
Morel Voice Coils: Madisound Speaker Components
It's the loading and front plates that have variation. The twin dome plate in question is just a bit of clever integration, IMO.
Morel TM4055-8 2" Midrange and 1-1/8" Tweeter Speaker Plate
There is a strength to this sort of combination in very good time alignment.
Morel Voice Coils: Madisound Speaker Components
It's the loading and front plates that have variation. The twin dome plate in question is just a bit of clever integration, IMO.
Morel TM4055-8 2" Midrange and 1-1/8" Tweeter Speaker Plate
There is a strength to this sort of combination in very good time alignment.
I say this in a friendly way, 33Pollhigh, but lobing above and below axis is caused by the typical Butterworth solutions that use 90 degree phase alignment to work their own power-flat magic. It shouldn't be an issue in phase aligned designs. The lobe is horizontal, whatever the order of the filter.
And MTTM can fix this with Butterworth:
My own experience with soft domes is they work better with steep filters. They have inherent problems with Fs resonance and the lack of spider and an uncontrolled central breakup that is best unprovoked. The 1 1/8" Morel CAT298 sounds terrible on second order to me, but is a pleasure on 4th order:
Troels is driven to 4th order with his dome midrange design too. Partly for pahse alignment, IMO. SP38/13
I'd love to hear that one. Must be good!
Are we talking about the same thing? Lobing as in an off axis "suckout" is a physical reality caused by having two sources playing the same sound at distances generally greater than one wavelength (though it certainly doesn't start at one wavelength). If this isn't the case then I'm all ears.
Pretty much any tweeter crossover will have it, but steeper is better all things equal. An MTM makes it symmetrical which is nice.
Also, how does a steep slope reduce a "central break up" on a soft dome?
The morel unit does seem like a good idea to me, probably not much diffraction either.
Edit: I just reread what you posted. I think you're saying the angle and shape of the lobe is affected by crossover. The only way to make it symmetrical though AFAIK is with something like an mtm.
Last edited:
Here are the measurements of a review of a $40,000 speaker that uses a 5" poly cone mid crossed to a 2" ribbon. The crossover point is high but the slope isn't mentioned. To me this seems like a bad idea. A dome mid and smaller ribbon would seem to make more sense.
Verity Audio Sarastro II loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Atkinson's comments are some of the most negative I've seen on a measurements section. But then we all know measurements aren't everything.
Verity Audio Sarastro II loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Atkinson's comments are some of the most negative I've seen on a measurements section. But then we all know measurements aren't everything.
That Raal should be capable of a 2.5k xover.
In the case of a 5"/ribbon, in most cases, any larger woofer would not work. Some even require a 4" for extension purposes. Back to 5", the highest I would go is 3k if at all possible. This usually makes the CTC a little too long in terms of placement, but the image does not sound stretched.
BTW, I've done 3x five/ribbon combos.
Later,
Wolf
In the case of a 5"/ribbon, in most cases, any larger woofer would not work. Some even require a 4" for extension purposes. Back to 5", the highest I would go is 3k if at all possible. This usually makes the CTC a little too long in terms of placement, but the image does not sound stretched.
BTW, I've done 3x five/ribbon combos.
Later,
Wolf
This is the published data from the site, Fs is 450hz, sensitivity 94db and no power handling data. Fs and FR is quite close to the Morel em 1308 though the bigger diameter.
Cheers,
Vamzi.
Quick and dirty comparison between the Morel EM1308 and SB MD60N plus specs. Data taken off datasheets from both company sites with graphs re-sized to be the same scale.
I am hoping that the full data and production unit graphs plus prices and availability for the SB are going to be announced next month as previously touted (iirc there is a big HIFI show in the far east then?).
I am hoping that the full data and production unit graphs plus prices and availability for the SB are going to be announced next month as previously touted (iirc there is a big HIFI show in the far east then?).
Attachments
I think dome midranges provide the most natural sounding midrange.
The Yamaha NS5000 speakers which use Zylon dome midranges have the best and most real sounding midrange I have heard.Experienced audiophile friends who have heard them have come to the same conclusion.
I owned a pair of Sonique Encore Special Edition speakers which used two Dynaudio D52 dome mids and a Dynaudio Esotec 260 tweeter per speaker and they also sounded superb.Unfortunately the bass was not up to the same standard as the rest.
I currently own Yamaha NS 75T speakers which use a titanium dome mid and which sound fantastic [much better than the NS1000s].
Visaton make some speaker kits using dome mids which appear to be good value.
The Yamaha NS5000 speakers which use Zylon dome midranges have the best and most real sounding midrange I have heard.Experienced audiophile friends who have heard them have come to the same conclusion.
I owned a pair of Sonique Encore Special Edition speakers which used two Dynaudio D52 dome mids and a Dynaudio Esotec 260 tweeter per speaker and they also sounded superb.Unfortunately the bass was not up to the same standard as the rest.
I currently own Yamaha NS 75T speakers which use a titanium dome mid and which sound fantastic [much better than the NS1000s].
Visaton make some speaker kits using dome mids which appear to be good value.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.