Alright,
Is anyone online willing to share opinions / experience with compression tweeters?
I'm in the process of finalizing my system.
The mids are standard cones and so i'm unsure whether mixing compression with them would be sensible. (I know it's down to taste but I'm curious).
Mids/tweets will be powered seperately and I'll be able to adjust volume on the tweeters to match the mids seeing as its a mulitway (not passive).
So it's really a question of the dispersion effect.
The other, alternative to the compression tweeter is identical in specification except from dispersion/spl of course.
morel 378s - compression design (sens. 93db)
morel 308 - standard design (sens. 90db)
The mid cones (sens. 88db)
Any thoughts?
Is anyone online willing to share opinions / experience with compression tweeters?
I'm in the process of finalizing my system.
The mids are standard cones and so i'm unsure whether mixing compression with them would be sensible. (I know it's down to taste but I'm curious).
Mids/tweets will be powered seperately and I'll be able to adjust volume on the tweeters to match the mids seeing as its a mulitway (not passive).
So it's really a question of the dispersion effect.
The other, alternative to the compression tweeter is identical in specification except from dispersion/spl of course.
morel 378s - compression design (sens. 93db)
morel 308 - standard design (sens. 90db)
The mid cones (sens. 88db)
Any thoughts?
giro1991,
The 378 appear to be just a small lens/wave guide rather than really a compression driver. Your point is correct however that the main difference is the dispersion pattern of the sound. Given; the right size cone mid, XO freq, proper phase tracking in the XO range, and equivalent EQ, I would expect the 378 to do a better job providing a smoother transition in horizontal dispersion. The effect is directionally toward the CD horns, but much more limited in dispersion width than a large 90° CD horn would be.
There seems to a lot of recent emphasis on the importance of horizontal dispersion transition to sound quality. It does seem logical to me that this would be helpful for a wider listening area and smoother freq response.
I don't know if the difference will be significant in this case or not, but I do like the wider pattern at high freq of the 378.
The 378 appear to be just a small lens/wave guide rather than really a compression driver. Your point is correct however that the main difference is the dispersion pattern of the sound. Given; the right size cone mid, XO freq, proper phase tracking in the XO range, and equivalent EQ, I would expect the 378 to do a better job providing a smoother transition in horizontal dispersion. The effect is directionally toward the CD horns, but much more limited in dispersion width than a large 90° CD horn would be.
There seems to a lot of recent emphasis on the importance of horizontal dispersion transition to sound quality. It does seem logical to me that this would be helpful for a wider listening area and smoother freq response.
I don't know if the difference will be significant in this case or not, but I do like the wider pattern at high freq of the 378.
Regarding wavelaunches is this through personal obvservation?
I liked 378 also because the 308 plate diameter mismatch the cabinets.
I did find an archive listing peceding models with the correct dia though,
for example, morel MDT 30S, predesessor of 308 actually has the correct diameter.
I'll look on ebay for these models and perhaps arrange a faceplate swap if sellers prove willing.
Thanks for the response either way
I liked 378 also because the 308 plate diameter mismatch the cabinets.
I did find an archive listing peceding models with the correct dia though,
for example, morel MDT 30S, predesessor of 308 actually has the correct diameter.
I'll look on ebay for these models and perhaps arrange a faceplate swap if sellers prove willing.
Thanks for the response either way
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.