They are a winner, but their weaknesses are in the areas which are important to me, namely resolution and imaging/presentation. 12" drivers simply don't have the resolution of 8", let alone one mounted as OB.
So, what are you listening to at the moment?
My experience with WG-speakers so far is that they image very well and better than dipoles. Dipoles are easy to like, while WG-speakers take some getting used to. I like the size (they sound big), lifelikeness and envelopment of dipoles, but I've come to appreciate the precision, cleanness and dynamics of waveguides too. I wish there was a way to combine their strengths.
My experience with WG-speakers so far is that they image very well and better than dipoles. Dipoles are easy to like, while WG-speakers take some getting used to. I like the size (they sound big), lifelikeness and envelopment of dipoles, but I've come to appreciate the precision, cleanness and dynamics of waveguides too. I wish there was a way to combine their strengths.
I listen to the Dipoles most of the time. But it's just a quick 10 mins. job to swap with either WG speakers or Omni 
One problem I find with WG compared to dipoles and omni, is that it cannot project a soundstage/image which is beyond the room. The boundaries are too clear-cut and hence can be tiring after sometimes. I think SL refers to this effect as "sharp rectangular window" as opposed to "ellipsiodal cloud". Perhaps I could relate to that but not sure.
One problem I find with WG compared to dipoles and omni, is that it cannot project a soundstage/image which is beyond the room. The boundaries are too clear-cut and hence can be tiring after sometimes. I think SL refers to this effect as "sharp rectangular window" as opposed to "ellipsiodal cloud". Perhaps I could relate to that but not sure.
I've used DE250 on the round 10" dayton, and it did not measure nor sounded good. D220Ti is better. I've also used the foam and did not like it due to loss of higher frequency resolution. This is comparing with same target acoustical output (the foam causes -1db to -2db attenuation to the tweeters).
This is both on the dipoles and econowaves. I will report full finding after many tries later.
This is both on the dipoles and econowaves. I will report full finding after many tries later.
B&C DE250 upgrade
I upgraded the compression drivers with DE250. This driver has much less distortions compared to D220Ti.
Fortunately also, the excellent polar response with dayton 10" waveguide is maintained.
What's great about this waveguide aside from polar response, is that it does not exhibit on-axis dip typical to round waveguides like oblate spheroid profile. It's great to be listened on-axis:
I upgraded the compression drivers with DE250. This driver has much less distortions compared to D220Ti.
Fortunately also, the excellent polar response with dayton 10" waveguide is maintained.
What's great about this waveguide aside from polar response, is that it does not exhibit on-axis dip typical to round waveguides like oblate spheroid profile. It's great to be listened on-axis:
What gives here?gainphile said:
Mine did with the D220Ti. Not a big one, but one none the less.
Dan
The D220Ti is harsh sounding due to titanium breakup at about 8k and its harmonics. It's well documented elsewhere.
The DE250 is smooth sounding, uses mylar/plastic.
But in terms of polar plot with given waveguide, the D220Ti is actually better.
In your comparisons, have you tried to eliminate the possibility of suggestion? I doubt that any audible difference between de B&C and the Selenium could be due to harmonic distortion, simply because low levels of harmonic distortions are very difficult to hear. I'm not sure about the 8 khz break-up. Could you show us some comparative measurements of the frequency response with the DE250 and the D220?
Yesterday I measured the D220Ti on the 12" Dayton WG and it's quite messy from 5 khz on up. This is very visible in the impulse response too. The resonances are at the same frequencies when I you look off-axis. Now I wonder if it's the compression driver or maybe the combination.
I'd very much like to see your impulse responses and frequency response curves. Is the B&C really that much cleaner?
I'd very much like to see your impulse responses and frequency response curves. Is the B&C really that much cleaner?
There had been quite a dicussion at AK as D220Ti is the darling of econowave.
D220Ti
DE250
It's generally acknowledged that the selenium is harsher sounding, but it's 3rd of the cost of DE250, hence a concious decision. The above are my measurement with pyle waveguide, not the round dayton I'm using with the dipoles. But should be typical.
Actually I put back the D220Ti again this evening just for curiosity. I thought they resolve more, but then on certain material the breakup/harshness would appear. The whole thing sounded like typical metal/soft dome effects. It's not entirely bad though.
After getting accustomed to both drivers, I'd be happy to live with either.
I have a 12" dayton but have not used it. DE250 + Dayton 10" is like this:
D220Ti
DE250
It's generally acknowledged that the selenium is harsher sounding, but it's 3rd of the cost of DE250, hence a concious decision. The above are my measurement with pyle waveguide, not the round dayton I'm using with the dipoles. But should be typical.
Actually I put back the D220Ti again this evening just for curiosity. I thought they resolve more, but then on certain material the breakup/harshness would appear. The whole thing sounded like typical metal/soft dome effects. It's not entirely bad though.
After getting accustomed to both drivers, I'd be happy to live with either.
I have a 12" dayton but have not used it. DE250 + Dayton 10" is like this:
Last edited:
Still just the dome.
Actually it's never worked perfectly. After sometimes I'd notice the incoherence and tonal defficiencies. Sometimes I just turn off the rear tweeter, but this has it's own problem.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.