We mesured a speaker yesterday with Earthworks QTC1 and Behringer ECM8000 and they gave different distortion results with higher readings of the ECM8000.
I swapped the QTC1 for another QTC1 and got identical results and did this to check that the positioning of the mic's was close enough not to mock up the results.
Unfortunately there was some beer and wine involved so I saved the same file two times and therefore I can't share the measurements. But in due time I will have the chance to compare again and will share the results then.
Regarding simulations, please also consider what will happen (strongly dependent on phase) when a speaker with asymetrical distortion is measured by a mic with asymetrical disortion when the even order harmonics are close in level.
/Peter
I swapped the QTC1 for another QTC1 and got identical results and did this to check that the positioning of the mic's was close enough not to mock up the results.
Unfortunately there was some beer and wine involved so I saved the same file two times and therefore I can't share the measurements. But in due time I will have the chance to compare again and will share the results then.
Regarding simulations, please also consider what will happen (strongly dependent on phase) when a speaker with asymetrical distortion is measured by a mic with asymetrical disortion when the even order harmonics are close in level.
/Peter
smellygas said:
Now it's not only my bad english, I also can't understand... You don't know me and you don't know how much I understand English. You are "speculating" on my English level. You don't seem to understand me on the other hand. I'm starting to think that you fail to analyze correctly what I say for some reason. Maybe I'm doing something wrong in your viewpoint. Maybe I'm going too fast and not giving you enough context so you have problems following me. I'm not always doing perfectly organized posts, I'm like that in real life, often jumping from a subject to another and that could be hard to follow on a forum. I quote you, then I answer your quote. If it doesn't make sense to you, maybe it would be a good idea to check what your quote was about, since your quote is about my own earlier text, maybe it would be a good idea to read either my earlier post or your earlier post again. If I need to put my quote, then your quote of my quote, then my answer to your quote about my ealier quote so you can understand, tell me... (hard to follow here, but I think you can understand this very well !) You can also ask for explanations when you don't understand me and I will reformulate it. Every time you don't understand someone, do you put his English at fault ? I don't think so since I'm also sure you're a very intelligent person. Ever heard of : "Don't shoot the messenger" ? Instead of argumenting with me, you prefer to resort to attacking me or diverting attention instead of attacking my argumentation.
Now, I will reply to other points in your quote. I will divide my argumentation in two parts, two different viewpoints. I think I found out where the problem is. Tell me if I'm wrong please.
Now, from a certain point of view, you are not speculating in that specific issue because you want to illustrate your point that Zaph may have been influenced by Madisound to make design choices. Then I could say that I didn't speculate either in that specific issue and I didn't draw a hard conclusion, since I used the words "maybe to him". "Because, maybe to him, the 6600 sounds better than the 7000, or the difference is negligible." Without those words, I agree with you that it would be a hard conclusion and pure speculation. That sentence only means that maybe in his point of view, the 6600 sounds better than the 7000, or maybe it does not.
From another certain point of view, yes, I'm speculating that Zaph did take the 6600 over the 7000 due to superior performance. On the other hand, I'm saying you are not better than me, since you speculate that it could be Madisound that made the choice mandatory. We both don't know, we both speculate. If you don't like speculation, why are you also using it against me ? I often like to speculate and I don't mind if you also speculate. On the other hand, don't bash me for speculating, since you use the same argumentation tactic. If it's good for you, it's good for me.
Was the problem there ? Thanks.
I would like to add that the speculated 6600 superiority over the 7000 wasn't my idea. It came from Jay. I just wanted to add that maybe Zaph thinks the same as Jay. It's not a conclusion that I want to do myself (6600 vs 7000 debate), since to me, both are high priced tweeters so I would be a bit harsh towards both the 6600 and the 7000 (and many other high priced tweeters).
I will say it in other words then, and use more words to put you in context. I said that in my opinion, measurements can predict quite accurately what a tweeter will sound like. I said that the Dayton ND20FB "could" sound the same, or even better than a 7000 over 4 kHz. I didn't say that a Dayton ND20FB will sound the same over 4 kHz. I said a Dayton ND20FB "could" be a fair comparison to a 7000 if crossed at 4 kHz. I didn't say that a Dayton ND20FB will win the comparison. As you said yourself, I predict (using your words from your earlier quote) a Dayton ND20FB "could" sound the same, or even win versus a 7000 when crossed over 4 kHz.
That's fine with me. I agree that the equipment is not high end and the tests are limited. On the other hand, all tests are done with the same equipment and in the same conditions, so the evaluation can still be used to compare tweeters measured in those conditions against each other using the limited tests, to produce valid results. You need to take into account the shortcomings of the comparison, but it can help you alot.
You're welcome. I just want to add : "I think that it is very nice that you feel that a $20 tweeter could sound better than the 7000 if crossed over 4 kHz with a well built crossover network". (bold text added by me) I want to add this, because I'm not foolish enough to think that a 20$ tweeter is better all around than a 7000. For example, you can cross a 7000 very low easily and I wouldn't do that with a 20$ tweeter. I just think that a 20$ tweeter can perform just as good or better than a 7000, on a limited bandwidth in certain conditions.
Good luck on your search.
Pan said:
Hi Pan,
I find that very interesting. I would like to see those results. Maybe you could compare a few speakers together, to see if even with the Behringer ECM8000, you could draw accurate conclusions about the sound quality. I mean, maybe if the readings are higher, the results would be still coherent, since maybe even if the microphone distortion and the speaker distortion are in the same order of magnitude, you can still interpret one speaker as better than the other. That would mean that Zaph method may work, since all results are made with the same microphone, even if it's inferior in quality.
Since you seem very knowledgeable in the area of microphones, in your opinion, does that Earthworks QTC1 have some "more affordable" competition ? That looks like a very fine microphone, but it's much more expensive versus a Behringer ECM8000. Is there a compromise to be found ?
Also, sorry to annoy you again. Did you see the first part of my last reply ? I would like to see the results you published about the Accuton diamond tweeters please, it interests me alot, those diamond tweeters always ticked my curiosity.
Thank you very much and sorry again !
simon5 said:
And once again, thank you for your input. I still think it is very nice that you feel that a $20 tweeter could sound better than the 7000 (when crossed over at 4kHz with a well-built crossover) based on zero listening tests, zero experience, and your own interpretation of a set of measurements printed on an internet website. If that is sufficient information for you to make decisions regarding your projects, that's great. For me, it's not.
SG
Gentlemen that's enough. I am surprised there are not better things to keep you entertained on this site and I am strongly recommending we move on and back to topic. In other words, no more please.
I will keep an eye on this thread for those wishing to continue in this most ungentlemanly manner. It's been a long time since I put someone in the sinbin and I'd like to keep it that way.
Fair enough?
So back on topic. My original question was essentially, can anyone who is personally experienced with the R2904/7000 suggest a different tweeter that sounded better to him/her?
Note: this isn't a "post your favorite tweeter" thread
Note: please, no more debate about distortion measurements being the sole determinant of sound quality
Note: please, no other off-topic debates
So far, only one person, Inertial, has really answered the question.
SG
Note: this isn't a "post your favorite tweeter" thread
Note: please, no more debate about distortion measurements being the sole determinant of sound quality
Note: please, no other off-topic debates
So far, only one person, Inertial, has really answered the question.
SG
My FAVORITE tweeter in the whole wide world is the B&C DE250!!!
Sorry, couldn't resist. I think the question is one of those "forest for the trees" problems. I have been an audiophile for over 30 years and personally heard almost all of the "highest of the high end" speakers. They all sounded pathetic once I heard a good compression driver in a proper waveguide. Even the tweeter in the latest darling Magico sounds lifeless and compressed by comparison.
Sorry, couldn't resist. I think the question is one of those "forest for the trees" problems. I have been an audiophile for over 30 years and personally heard almost all of the "highest of the high end" speakers. They all sounded pathetic once I heard a good compression driver in a proper waveguide. Even the tweeter in the latest darling Magico sounds lifeless and compressed by comparison.
You have seen the light!Horizons said:My FAVORITE tweeter in the whole wide world is the B&C DE250!!!
Sorry, couldn't resist. I think the question is one of those "forest for the trees" problems. I have been an audiophile for over 30 years and personally heard almost all of the "highest of the high end" speakers. They all sounded pathetic once I heard a good compression driver in a proper waveguide. Even the tweeter in the latest darling Magico sounds lifeless and compressed by comparison.
Smellygas,
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet (I haven't read through the entire thread), but I believe ShinOBIWAN used the Ring Radiator in one of his previous iterations and found the RAAL 140-15D to be a significant improvement over it.
Here are some quotes from his LGT thread, you may have to read through the thread if you wish to get the whole picture, but I believe these illustrate the point pretty well as far as experience goes.
Is this what you're looking for?
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet (I haven't read through the entire thread), but I believe ShinOBIWAN used the Ring Radiator in one of his previous iterations and found the RAAL 140-15D to be a significant improvement over it.
Here are some quotes from his LGT thread, you may have to read through the thread if you wish to get the whole picture, but I believe these illustrate the point pretty well as far as experience goes.
LaMa said:
Is this what you're looking for?
Hi all,
this has become a significant thread, it's very interesting to see that there IS something like truth.......
The measurements on Zaph's website do confirm my own measurments. I don't know how many of you really "heard" and measured all tweeters discussed here.
When we were measuring Vifa's XT 25 we have been really impressed.
When we measured the SS ring-radiator even more:
Results have been more than convincing in both cases. Quite similar, with SS better at any point of view. Nothing to wonder about, I guess, prices is ten times higher....
We measured the 6600 illuminator (first version) vs ring-radiator and the DX 25 Vifa vs XT 25.
But:
In both cases, after measuring for days, studying various x-overs, we checked them all in the same monitor, equipped with 15cm Revelator woofer.
As this has been a (nearly) no-limit budget project, we simply wanted to chose the "best" one.
Actually that was impossible. This thread started with the question which tweeter can beat SS's ring radiator........ so, you're searching for the best (better) tweeter?
Here is my answer:
If you want to buy the best measurement results.......go for the SS ring-radiator.
We have been in three to get a final decision, after a quite long period of listening tests:
Noone had any doubt: We went for the 6600, all three of us.
That is hard to explain, I think, as all measuring seemed to be pro ring-radiator...........
Ok, maybe the ring-radiator sounded even more "accurate", more "precise", more "analytical". But, as the woofer was a scanspeak 15 (no ultra-fast hardcone) we didn't aim at building a speaker as a "measuring-instrument", but a really "nice-sounding" speaker, warm and tonal balanced. The 6600 was much closer to that....... much "better" .......
Regards the same round for the Vifas......:
The XT was out of discussion immediately. Why? Same reasons as the SS's, but faaaaar worse....
By the way: Someone tried to use it, to develop a x-over?? If so, I would be curious to see them, as we found out only one working x-over for it ( yes: one! phase adjustment for the XT is really boring........at the end, only one x-over frequency, one type of x-over possible, cut @ 1,5 khz ? try it! Even if measurements promised a lot!)
The DX 25 was chosen as low-cost alternative for the SS 6600.
In the beginning I said there IS a kind of "truth":
Yes, I still think so, also looking at Zaph's really great work, but I think we are still far away from being able to describe a drivers sound by measurements......
Heiko
this has become a significant thread, it's very interesting to see that there IS something like truth.......
The measurements on Zaph's website do confirm my own measurments. I don't know how many of you really "heard" and measured all tweeters discussed here.
When we were measuring Vifa's XT 25 we have been really impressed.
When we measured the SS ring-radiator even more:
Results have been more than convincing in both cases. Quite similar, with SS better at any point of view. Nothing to wonder about, I guess, prices is ten times higher....
We measured the 6600 illuminator (first version) vs ring-radiator and the DX 25 Vifa vs XT 25.
But:
In both cases, after measuring for days, studying various x-overs, we checked them all in the same monitor, equipped with 15cm Revelator woofer.
As this has been a (nearly) no-limit budget project, we simply wanted to chose the "best" one.
Actually that was impossible. This thread started with the question which tweeter can beat SS's ring radiator........ so, you're searching for the best (better) tweeter?
Here is my answer:
If you want to buy the best measurement results.......go for the SS ring-radiator.
We have been in three to get a final decision, after a quite long period of listening tests:
Noone had any doubt: We went for the 6600, all three of us.
That is hard to explain, I think, as all measuring seemed to be pro ring-radiator...........
Ok, maybe the ring-radiator sounded even more "accurate", more "precise", more "analytical". But, as the woofer was a scanspeak 15 (no ultra-fast hardcone) we didn't aim at building a speaker as a "measuring-instrument", but a really "nice-sounding" speaker, warm and tonal balanced. The 6600 was much closer to that....... much "better" .......
Regards the same round for the Vifas......:
The XT was out of discussion immediately. Why? Same reasons as the SS's, but faaaaar worse....
By the way: Someone tried to use it, to develop a x-over?? If so, I would be curious to see them, as we found out only one working x-over for it ( yes: one! phase adjustment for the XT is really boring........at the end, only one x-over frequency, one type of x-over possible, cut @ 1,5 khz ? try it! Even if measurements promised a lot!)
The DX 25 was chosen as low-cost alternative for the SS 6600.
In the beginning I said there IS a kind of "truth":
Yes, I still think so, also looking at Zaph's really great work, but I think we are still far away from being able to describe a drivers sound by measurements......
Heiko
audiomar said:
Your reasearch nows leads us to ask the next question - which woofer will mate best with the 6600?
The contenders: The Illuminator 15WU/8741/18WU8741 or the Revelator 15W8531/18W8531? Or given that SS tweeters are mostly 4 ohms, should we consdier the 4ohm versions of these woofers instead?
Assumption: those that are require a 3 way or sub-sat solution would prefer the 15cm and those who are looking for a bit more low end would prefer the 18cm version of the woofer.
So people who uses an (expensive) supertweeter are crazy, IYO?
LOL
Compare a multitone THD of a cheap tweeter to the accuton 20mm diamond and the notion of impeccable will change meaning.
Well said.
But I want to be subjective for once
I so much prefer a well done textile domes to ring radiators.
9900 > 7000 to my ears.
Sure, the BMS ring radiators
Higher efficiency and lower distortion than anything mentioned in this thread, and constant directivity on the proper waveguide.
Well said.
But I want to be subjective for once
I so much prefer a well done textile domes to ring radiators.
9900 > 7000 to my ears.
That might not be as subjective as you think. The dispersion for the 9900 and 7000 is somewhat different and could easily account for your preference towards the 99.
Bump!
Very interesting thread. I actually read from 1st to the very last post made above me.
But there was no conclusion to what is a better tweeter.
Since this thread is over 2 years old with no information update, I wonder anyone has actually owned, build, listened and measured the three tweeters below.
I like to hear someone's opinion both subjective and objectively for the tweeters below and how they stack up in the HD and Dispersion accuracy.
Scanspeak D3004/6640-00 Be Dome
Scanspeak R2904/7000-00 Ring Radiator
RAAL 150-4D Amorphous Core Ribbon
Very interesting thread. I actually read from 1st to the very last post made above me.
But there was no conclusion to what is a better tweeter.
Since this thread is over 2 years old with no information update, I wonder anyone has actually owned, build, listened and measured the three tweeters below.
I like to hear someone's opinion both subjective and objectively for the tweeters below and how they stack up in the HD and Dispersion accuracy.
Scanspeak D3004/6640-00 Be Dome
Scanspeak R2904/7000-00 Ring Radiator
RAAL 150-4D Amorphous Core Ribbon
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.