Dynaudio did not stop making great drivers, they just stopped selling them to us after being bought out by TC Group.
They still replace old ones but you will have to send in the dead one to get a new one and they are charging double now.
There is a guy in Germany , Luciano , or Lucianissimo I don't remember which, who told me he sells his speaker to all opera stars and Pavarotti himself bought one.
The speaker is a 12" Utah coax driver (tweeter removed and ball phase plug installed) in 5 Cu.ft (155 liter) ported enclosure and big Heil ribbon crossed at 1.2Khz . (last speaker you ever build he said
.Personally I would not use ribbon tweeter below 7khz 3rd order and preferably higher that that , but what do I know...
I was listening to RALL top tweeter crossed at 10k over the Lowther field coil (courtesy to Jon ,Lowther America rep) a week ago and I felt that it could be crossed higher that that .It was dragging to much attention to itself (oh , how beautiful I sound
Last edited:
There is a guy in Germany , Luciano , or Lucianissimo I don't remember which, who told me he sells his speaker to all opera stars and Pavarotti himself bought one.
The speaker is a 12" Utah coax driver (tweeter removed and ball phase plug installed) in 5 Cu.ft (155 liter) ported enclosure and big Heil ribbon crossed at 1.2Khz . (last speaker you ever build he said
Personally I would not use ribbon tweeter below 7khz 3rd order and preferably higher that that , but what do I know...
I was listening to RALL top tweeter crossed at 10k over the Lowther field coil (courtesy to Jon ,Lowther America rep) a week ago and I felt that it could be crossed higher that that .It was dragging to much attention to itself (oh , how beautiful I sound
Yeah, the big heil is good all the way down to about 1khz or so. They say you can use em as low as 800, but I think I'd probably have a few beers one night and cost myself 600 bucks worth of tweeters, lol.
I think the ones I remember were crossed around 1.2 khz, 12dbe.
Re JP3.0
i looked at these but i dont think the JP types are available. The main difference is a heavier laminated on the new types. Of these the cd1.0 is cheapest. Nearly went with them, but the WG appealed so i spent the extra quid or so. I would love a real heil but i went for the affordable option, so that it doesnt upstage the woofer! I dont feel the 3.5H is attention seeking lol im crossing just higher than the minimum recommendation, with a 4th order/3rd plus notch at turnover. Higher would be nice, but im approaching the point of diminishing returns above 4k with the AL130. With another mid driver, however, it may be possible.
i looked at these but i dont think the JP types are available. The main difference is a heavier laminated on the new types. Of these the cd1.0 is cheapest. Nearly went with them, but the WG appealed so i spent the extra quid or so. I would love a real heil but i went for the affordable option, so that it doesnt upstage the woofer! I dont feel the 3.5H is attention seeking lol im crossing just higher than the minimum recommendation, with a 4th order/3rd plus notch at turnover. Higher would be nice, but im approaching the point of diminishing returns above 4k with the AL130. With another mid driver, however, it may be possible.
Anything should really work well covering only 10k +. Apart from IM products we cannot hear any of the harmonics associated with 10k+, not to mention music contains very little content up that high.
I don't think Zaph hates ribbons or has an agenda with regards to them, more he finds them difficulty to justify and it is easy to see why. Most 2 ways require a crossover around 2kHz and most ribbons cannot cut it, if they can, they cost a lot and are generally large format so generate other issues just because of that.
In a world where you can buy a small dome tweeter for very little, that will integrate well with almost any typical 2 way design, you can see why the choice of a ribbon looks less then attractive.
So far I haven't used a ribbon in any of my designs for the above reasons. I don't dislike ribbons, far from it, I want to use one, only it will require a design that is specifically aimed at allowing it to work well with a ribbon.
I don't think Zaph hates ribbons or has an agenda with regards to them, more he finds them difficulty to justify and it is easy to see why. Most 2 ways require a crossover around 2kHz and most ribbons cannot cut it, if they can, they cost a lot and are generally large format so generate other issues just because of that.
In a world where you can buy a small dome tweeter for very little, that will integrate well with almost any typical 2 way design, you can see why the choice of a ribbon looks less then attractive.
So far I haven't used a ribbon in any of my designs for the above reasons. I don't dislike ribbons, far from it, I want to use one, only it will require a design that is specifically aimed at allowing it to work well with a ribbon.
Basically he's saying they have higher distortion than a good dome tweeter which is generally true, the problem I have is with his statement that anybody that prefers the sound of a ribbon must prefer it because the distortion is higher...
I agree. The main differences between a typical ribbon and a typical dome are vertical directivity, and diffraction. Most ribbons are rectangular and larger on the long side than the diameter of a dome tweeter, so they will throw an asymmetric pattern. That is likely fine, until one stands up. I suppose I'm in the minority but sometimes I stand up when listening, so a more symmetrical vertical pattern is my preference.
Also, most ribbons/planars seem to be designed entirely without regard to diffraction control, with the element inset behind the faceplate, and plenty of abrupt transitions in the "throat." Look at this diffraction train wreck!
I suspect diffraction is the overriding reason that, to me, ribbons invariably sound edgy compared to well-executed concentric drivers (crossed over high enough to minimize midrange throw, and with a phase plug optimized for concentric use, a la Mark Dodd's two variants, the KEF "Tangerine" and Tannoy "Tulip.") or waveguide-loaded compression drivers. (Domes on 180deg waveguides simply don't enter the picture for me, except in very very small speakers.) The only exception to that rule of which I can think is the Philips/ATD spiral planar used by Genesis. Sweet, sweet tweeter, if one can cross it high enough and is then willing to live with limited dynamics.
The corollary to that is that to avoid throwing a mushroom cloud of energy in the horizontal axis at the bottom of the ribbon's passband, it either needs to be loaded in a real waveguide that actually constrains the ribbon's directivity, or the midrange drivers have to be very narrow. The ribbons with which I've played - Raven, Aurum Cantus, LCY - have all been on basically 180deg baffles; the LCY had a slightly concave faceplate but a sharp transition to the flange, like the old Peerless soft domes).
In the vertical axis, there's no hope for ribbons/planars/AMT's really, unless they're so long and have enough throw to play down to the upper bass.
I've seen many more with 180deg waveguides (flat flanges) than more narrow-pattern waveguides. I wouldn't consider a little stub flare, as on the picture above a "waveguide" in any meaningful sense.
That said, I would like to hear a ribbon (or planar, or AMT) in a real waveguide, with a modicum of attention to reducing diffraction. Such a driver has thus far eluded me.
Last edited:
The trouble I have here is that in ways I agree with what all of you have said.
I simmed my xo circuit that I used to test. It is NOT perfect. just a means of protecting the ribbon, and getting the response to as near that of the dome as possible; to compare the two.
All I did was add another Resistor to the input side of the HP filter from the G20SC in my signature project, 10 Ohms, which Ive since increased to 12, to make it a little more 'Englische'.
@ Pallas:
I understand the vertical pattern problem, Im not a huge fan of moving 45° and hearing only the woofer....usually dull, and with luck not all breakup. With the AL130 it is DULL, a little high end comes through. But this is mediated a little by the 1m height of the speakers.
I half regretted not mounting the tweeter under the woofer, for a sitting position, but it isnt a problem with either ribbon or dome. If I stand up and move to maybe 1.5m (I am nearly 2m tall), then i get almost zero tweeter (just reflection off my clothing mainly), but to be totally blunt, Ive heard few domes that I could tolerate in near field.
I dont know why but i prefer cones or inverted domes within 1m-1.5m.
I dont know what the BL is likely to be for a ribbon, but I would imagine LOW. Flux is maybe 0.3T. so Bl/mms? what of that?
The ribbon does sound transiently better than the dome, but from what I stated above, can this actually be true?
enough postulating noobisms from me
On the WG transition thing though...the link shows the CD3.5H.
Madisound Speaker Store
From this angle in the picture, you can only see the edge of the ribbon, on the right side. The silver metal you can see is the polepiece on the left side. These are profiled to match the flare extension faceplate. There is the same mesh, and a small ~1mm gap between the 2 pieces, filled with the customary PU foam gasket. I think it does quite a smooth job of avoiding to many diffractive edges; not perfect, but more than the ribbon you show. Its probably around 60°x40° or something.
The reason you point out is one of THE reasons I avoided all the other founteks
I simmed my xo circuit that I used to test. It is NOT perfect. just a means of protecting the ribbon, and getting the response to as near that of the dome as possible; to compare the two.
All I did was add another Resistor to the input side of the HP filter from the G20SC in my signature project, 10 Ohms, which Ive since increased to 12, to make it a little more 'Englische'.
@ Pallas:
I understand the vertical pattern problem, Im not a huge fan of moving 45° and hearing only the woofer....usually dull, and with luck not all breakup. With the AL130 it is DULL, a little high end comes through. But this is mediated a little by the 1m height of the speakers.
I half regretted not mounting the tweeter under the woofer, for a sitting position, but it isnt a problem with either ribbon or dome. If I stand up and move to maybe 1.5m (I am nearly 2m tall), then i get almost zero tweeter (just reflection off my clothing mainly), but to be totally blunt, Ive heard few domes that I could tolerate in near field.
I dont know why but i prefer cones or inverted domes within 1m-1.5m.
I dont know what the BL is likely to be for a ribbon, but I would imagine LOW. Flux is maybe 0.3T. so Bl/mms? what of that?
The ribbon does sound transiently better than the dome, but from what I stated above, can this actually be true?
enough postulating noobisms from me
On the WG transition thing though...the link shows the CD3.5H.
Madisound Speaker Store
From this angle in the picture, you can only see the edge of the ribbon, on the right side. The silver metal you can see is the polepiece on the left side. These are profiled to match the flare extension faceplate. There is the same mesh, and a small ~1mm gap between the 2 pieces, filled with the customary PU foam gasket. I think it does quite a smooth job of avoiding to many diffractive edges; not perfect, but more than the ribbon you show. Its probably around 60°x40° or something.
The reason you point out is one of THE reasons I avoided all the other founteks
Last edited:
And where maybe, I disagree:
#1: Horns are great, but a fullrange horn, to me is like the Holy Grail.
Not attainable, not in this life. Multiway is the only way to go with them, perhaps more so than any other loading technique. But a good horn tweeter is effortless like nothing else. This ribbon comes close, only 90dBW, but effortless sounding.
#2: Narrower directivity is a compromise. I wouldnt cross a driver at 10k, ever. I dont like treble above 3k like a laser beam from a big driver, but i appreciate the reason folks do. Neither do I like 180° radiation of domes...not anymore. I tempered the G20SC using a felt square BBC LS5/3A style, and it helped a lot, but has side effects too unfortunately.
#3: I would imagine 'string' type resonance and harmonic content due to that resonant mode, could be worse in a ribbon, and I think that would be very very easy to measure and assume to be THD, which of course it is...in a strange way, just not produced by the motor, but the material. Perhaps that is another reasoning behind the laminated ribbons, besides durability.
#1: Horns are great, but a fullrange horn, to me is like the Holy Grail.
Not attainable, not in this life. Multiway is the only way to go with them, perhaps more so than any other loading technique. But a good horn tweeter is effortless like nothing else. This ribbon comes close, only 90dBW, but effortless sounding.
#2: Narrower directivity is a compromise. I wouldnt cross a driver at 10k, ever. I dont like treble above 3k like a laser beam from a big driver, but i appreciate the reason folks do. Neither do I like 180° radiation of domes...not anymore. I tempered the G20SC using a felt square BBC LS5/3A style, and it helped a lot, but has side effects too unfortunately.
#3: I would imagine 'string' type resonance and harmonic content due to that resonant mode, could be worse in a ribbon, and I think that would be very very easy to measure and assume to be THD, which of course it is...in a strange way, just not produced by the motor, but the material. Perhaps that is another reasoning behind the laminated ribbons, besides durability.
Last edited:
I agree. The main differences between a typical ribbon and a typical dome are vertical directivity, and diffraction. Most ribbons are rectangular and larger on the long side than the diameter of a dome tweeter, so they will throw an asymmetric pattern. That is likely fine, until one stands up. I suppose I'm in the minority but sometimes I stand up when listening, so a more symmetrical vertical pattern is my preference.
Also, most ribbons/planars seem to be designed entirely without regard to diffraction control, with the element inset behind the faceplate, and plenty of abrupt transitions in the "throat." Look at this diffraction train wreck!
I suspect diffraction is the overriding reason that, to me, ribbons invariably sound edgy compared to well-executed concentric drivers (crossed over high enough to minimize midrange throw, and with a phase plug optimized for concentric use, a la Mark Dodd's two variants, the KEF "Tangerine" and Tannoy "Tulip.") or waveguide-loaded compression drivers. (Domes on 180deg waveguides simply don't enter the picture for me, except in very very small speakers.) The only exception to that rule of which I can think is the Philips/ATD spiral planar used by Genesis. Sweet, sweet tweeter, if one can cross it high enough and is then willing to live with limited dynamics.
The corollary to that is that to avoid throwing a mushroom cloud of energy in the horizontal axis at the bottom of the ribbon's passband, it either needs to be loaded in a real waveguide that actually constrains the ribbon's directivity, or the midrange drivers have to be very narrow. The ribbons with which I've played - Raven, Aurum Cantus, LCY - have all been on basically 180deg baffles; the LCY had a slightly concave faceplate but a sharp transition to the flange, like the old Peerless soft domes).
In the vertical axis, there's no hope for ribbons/planars/AMT's really, unless they're so long and have enough throw to play down to the upper bass.
I've seen many more with 180deg waveguides (flat flanges) than more narrow-pattern waveguides. I wouldn't consider a little stub flare, as on the picture above a "waveguide" in any meaningful sense.
That said, I would like to hear a ribbon (or planar, or AMT) in a real waveguide, with a modicum of attention to reducing diffraction. Such a driver has thus far eluded me.
That's not a ribbon ...
Wondering what that should be... It looks like Fountek NeoX3 but it is not a ribbon!?
What that should be? A tweeter maybe...
Someday, I too would like to try a ribbon. Just from reading, it seems that you need to start with larger ones. Big bucks. I have to conclude they are just plain expensive and hard to build, so for the bucks, a $100 dome blows away a $100 ribbon. This is what Zaph is telling us. It is quite clear, value is significant in his reviews, not absolutes. Does a $300 dome still blow away a $1200 ribbon? Some day, some day.
I remember the original AMT-1's. They had attributes, but they had issues. Newer materials and newer magnets may mean an idea whose time is coming?
I noticed GoldenEar, a new start-up out of Baltimore is using a small AMT much like the old BIC did. They call it a "High Velocity Folded Ribbon" Should we notice? Well they are the same folks who did Polk and Definitive. Not high end, but solid value.
I remember the original AMT-1's. They had attributes, but they had issues. Newer materials and newer magnets may mean an idea whose time is coming?
I noticed GoldenEar, a new start-up out of Baltimore is using a small AMT much like the old BIC did. They call it a "High Velocity Folded Ribbon" Should we notice? Well they are the same folks who did Polk and Definitive. Not high end, but solid value.
the problem I have is with his statement that anybody that prefers the sound of a ribbon must prefer it because the distortion is higher...
A look in older threads of mine to see just how many tweeters I've tried this year. its extensive.
I used the AC-G3 ribbons and loved them. I've also used:
Morel ET338
Morel MDT30S
Morel Extreme
Scan Speak HDS
SB29 ring radiator
Vifa XT25-60
Peerless (forget the number Hxxxx)
The ribbon tweeters have really low mass and they start and stop on a dime. The transients are the magic with them. Thats my take. Im not buying the high distortion = detail theory. I think it comes from low mass with a way higher drive force per weight. If you can listen without moving around the room and cross to a midbass high enough, ribbons can please all day. I used the ribbon the longest and if the dispersion didnt bother me (you stand up and they sounded like they turned off) I'd still use them.
On that list, the HDS measures the best and sounds the worst (although still a great performer). With perfect recordings its a window but your average MP3 is going to make you run. None of the measurements tell you of its sterility and dry forwardness. Its the best tweeter for home theater and electronic music due to detail....again owed to low mass of the dome IMO.
I've used all of them active crossovers with various slopes, freq, ect, but the best one (SB29) sounded good with any crossover while the HDS just couldnt work for me. All of those tweeters were used with the same mid basses.
In the end Zaph dislikes subjective comparisons that cant be measured. Subjectively, while the HDS was good, it was the worst of the group in my builds with any crossover. So much for low distortion equaling best sound. Before you bash the input here by just saying it was my crossover......ALL of the other tweeters sounded great with ALL the crossover configs within reason. Its a characteristic of each tweeter's personality. The SB29 just sounds good out of the box and it didnt matter what crossover I picked. I actually just couldnt get it to sound bad.
The XT25 if used 2100 to 2400 LR4 was magic too.
If I was to pick a ribbon for a build now, I'd use the smaller Fountek units. They have the least ribbon like dispersion yet retain most of whats good in that type of tweeter.
Thats my input based on factual use.
I don't really find it a problem with a 50mm tall ribbon like the G2, sure the very top octave does drop noticeably when you stand up but its a smooth modest rolloff. 50mm is only twice the length of a 25mm dome after all.
The reduction in floor and ceiling reflection of the treble is quite beneficial for imaging in my opinion, particularly if you're listening relatively far away in a room with a standard height ceiling, which I did at my previous address.
As others pointed out by others thats probably not a pure ribbon but some sort of AMT driver, most ribbons have a single corrugated foil whereas that one is smooth. Although they look superficially similar I'm not sure that we can extrapolate between the two types of driver.Also, most ribbons/planars seem to be designed entirely without regard to diffraction control, with the element inset behind the faceplate, and plenty of abrupt transitions in the "throat." Look at this diffraction train wreck!
In any case, yes that one doesn't look the greatest for diffraction control, it looks like a Fountek driver, and not wanting to disparage them but I don't think they're as well designed as the Aurum Cantus drivers which they look superficially very similar to.
From what I remember at the time rumours were that some of the principles of Aurum Cantus left under less than amicable circumstances and started Fountek, producing drivers looking at first glance almost identical to the Aurum Cantus drivers, (and triggering some lawsuits, ironic in China where there is little regard for IP rights
) but if you look at the small details like the waveguide design they're quite different, possibly to avoid infringing patents...(Fountek was founded in 2005, Aurum Cantus was founded in 1994 and was producing ribbons as early as 1997, I bought my G2's in 2004)
If you look at the waveguide in a AC G2 its carefully designed, there is one expansion barely 1mm in front of the ribbon to transform the plannar wave into a spherical one, and the rest is CD style conical flare with the flare on the face plate perfectly matched to the flare formed by the magnet surfaces and top and bottom spacers. No problems with diffraction there.
Your subjective impression of ribbons sounding edgy is in contrast to what just about everyone else perceives. Sure, I haven't heard all ribbons and I'm sure there are badly executed ones, but edgy is not something I would associate with any decent ribbon.
The problem with blaming it on diffraction is that although a flat faceplate dome tweeter might have less diffraction on the actual driver itself, there is far MORE diffraction from cabinet edges, which is a very serious problem.
I have to disagree with the "180 degree baffles" comment. If you look at something like an AC G2 the waveguide does in fact do a lot more than you give credit for.
I've done full polar measurements for mine horizontal and vertical (unfortunately I did them with the driver unmounted, so there is a bit of diffraction off the edges of the faceplate itself, I need to redo them on a large baffle) and the waveguide does in fact give an approximate CD coverage in the horizontal plane of about 90-110 degrees from 3Khz up to 10Khz. Above 10Khz it narrows slightly to around 70 degrees at 20Khz.
There is no "mushroom cloud" in the horizontal plane at the low frequency end, certainly not like there is with ANY standard dome tweeter.
The vertical and horizontal directivity match up to about 3-4Khz and then the vertical starts to narrow progressively and smoothly above that.
Last edited:
I don't agree. Back when I was looking at ribbons in 2004 I was considering getting the large Aurum Cantus G3, but I simply couldn't afford it, and having never listened to a ribbon before I though it was far too big a punt to spend that much money on my first attempt at using a ribbon...
So I opted for the G2 which is very similar design but just under half the height. (And more importantly much more affordable
) And 8 years later I am still using them in my main speakers, I think that says a lot.I've found the 50mm high ribbon a good compromise - enough directivity in the vertical plane that floor and ceiling reflections are significantly reduced, (improved imaging at a distance) but not so directional that treble just disappears if you stand up. (It rolls of slightly but not that much)
Knowing what I know now I would probably not buy a tall ribbon such as a G3 because its simply too directional in the vertical plane, and all that extra length really isn't needed if you cross it over to a good midrange driver.
The G3 is 100dB/W/M, does anyone really need that ? The G2 is still 96dB/W/M, plenty IMHO by todays standards of low efficiency tweeters.
Trying to use a larger ribbon to go lower in frequency just penalises you in vertical directivity and forces a ridiculously large driver centre to centre spacing, introducing lobing problems.
Ribbons are best at high frequencies, thats where they should be used. Keep the ribbon relatively short, cross it over high and use it as a tweeter not a mid
There goes the expensive ribbon tweeter myth again. If you're talking about "boutique" brands like Raven you can get some ridiculously high prices, just like you can in the full range arena with drivers like Feastrex.
However is this really that expensive ?
Aurum Cantus G2 Ribbon Tweeter 276-402
$218 dollars today, they were selling for $149 before the Neodymium price hike of a year ago. A large part of the cost of a ribbon tweeter is the magnet, there's not much way to get around that as long as Neodymium prices are hiked up. If the prices of the raw materials come back down again (now production outside China is starting up again) then ribbon tweeters will come back down in price too. Even so, I don't think they're outrageously expensive now if you discount boutique brands like Raven, and avoid the very large long ribbon models.
Last edited:
Hi All,
I actually recently build a active speaker using the tweeter in the previous posts (it's a Fountek NeoCD2.0 by the way). I totally agree they should be crossed over quite high and with a relatively high order filter (I used 8th order LR). Otherwise distortion will be present. But I am one of those people that just sit in 1 place when I listen to music, and my room is "difficult" in terms of acoustics. So I like the narrow vertical dispersion pattern, and don't mind the high XO frequency. For me the performance is stellar, I can listen to it all day long, no problem.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/207159-trinium-my-latest-build.html
Just my 2 eurocents
I actually recently build a active speaker using the tweeter in the previous posts (it's a Fountek NeoCD2.0 by the way). I totally agree they should be crossed over quite high and with a relatively high order filter (I used 8th order LR). Otherwise distortion will be present. But I am one of those people that just sit in 1 place when I listen to music, and my room is "difficult" in terms of acoustics. So I like the narrow vertical dispersion pattern, and don't mind the high XO frequency. For me the performance is stellar, I can listen to it all day long, no problem.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/207159-trinium-my-latest-build.html
Just my 2 eurocents
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.