I am looking for a dipole mid-tweeter that can x-over a bit lower than most, preferably 1.5 khz or lower.
My budget is a bit strained so I looked at these from Dayton Audio: Dayton Audio AMTPRO-4 Air Motion Transformer Tweeter 4 Ohm
Any experience with these versus pricier AMTs?
My budget is a bit strained so I looked at these from Dayton Audio: Dayton Audio AMTPRO-4 Air Motion Transformer Tweeter 4 Ohm
Any experience with these versus pricier AMTs?
Dipole AMT/Ribbon or similar for OB?
That’s wrong:
When ESS combined its AMT with a 12“ woofer plus 12“ passive radiator in the seventies, crossover frequency was 1800Hz/18dB/Oct.
Nowadays they go down to 800Hz (see below)
http://www.essspeakersusa.com/ESS_FINAL.pdf
And a friend of mine uses it above 1400Hz with 24dB-Linkwith_Rigley filter.
If you don’t believe in its sonic qualities, may be the link below changes your mind:
[Review] ESS Heil Air Motion Transformer - [English]
The AMT is by far one of the best tweeters in the world which was ever designed. Because it has a rather large area (like a standard 8“-speaker) it will distort much later then most other tweeters.
That’s wrong:
When ESS combined its AMT with a 12“ woofer plus 12“ passive radiator in the seventies, crossover frequency was 1800Hz/18dB/Oct.
Nowadays they go down to 800Hz (see below)
http://www.essspeakersusa.com/ESS_FINAL.pdf
And a friend of mine uses it above 1400Hz with 24dB-Linkwith_Rigley filter.
If you don’t believe in its sonic qualities, may be the link below changes your mind:
[Review] ESS Heil Air Motion Transformer - [English]
The AMT is by far one of the best tweeters in the world which was ever designed. Because it has a rather large area (like a standard 8“-speaker) it will distort much later then most other tweeters.
You wrong, look at all the reviews and the waterfalls !
You can go at 1800 at the price of distorsion and break up material...
It's wrong too going above around 1000 hz with a 12" because of directivity and too slower cone in relation to the ESS, here you must go with a planar à la NEO 10 below, or a 2" CD or if you can't a less than 10 g paper cone 5 to 8". I hear some ess with 12"... ridiculous setup; Sorry it's an old known fact that ESS + 12" are a poor match.
I think plasma tweeter ARE the best tweeters if it has a sense to classify the drivers...
You can go at 1800 at the price of distorsion and break up material...
It's wrong too going above around 1000 hz with a 12" because of directivity and too slower cone in relation to the ESS, here you must go with a planar à la NEO 10 below, or a 2" CD or if you can't a less than 10 g paper cone 5 to 8". I hear some ess with 12"... ridiculous setup; Sorry it's an old known fact that ESS + 12" are a poor match.
I think plasma tweeter ARE the best tweeters if it has a sense to classify the drivers...
Last edited:
@Eldam
Jakja83's question was not for cone break up from woofers or for exotic tweeters:
He asked for an affordable tweeter which can go down to at least 1,5kHz.
The ESS AMT fulfills both targets, if you like it or not. Its distortion and waterfall diagram can be found in internet and can withstand all comparisons with most tweeters.
If you would kindly reread my words perhaps you will see that my examples refer to how deep the AMT can go down and NOT how high its neighbouring loudspeaker has to go....
Jakja83's question was not for cone break up from woofers or for exotic tweeters:
He asked for an affordable tweeter which can go down to at least 1,5kHz.
The ESS AMT fulfills both targets, if you like it or not. Its distortion and waterfall diagram can be found in internet and can withstand all comparisons with most tweeters.
If you would kindly reread my words perhaps you will see that my examples refer to how deep the AMT can go down and NOT how high its neighbouring loudspeaker has to go....
Wes I understand.
1,5 khz is too low because of a bump in the waterfall at 1800 to 2000 (depend on concistency during product process) and non damped movement with the polyethylen material of the ribon around 1000 than can be heard above ! Here we are not talking about impedance but breakup, airflow in the V load, and distorsions and level.
I never say it's bad tweeter, I believe it's a good tweeter not a mid tweeter. Many serious reviewers talk about 1,5k in theory but advise to beginn at 2000 and often don't like what the hear below 2200 to 2500 (depend on the concistency). In 70s' we try to stack 2 to 4 ESS to go lower than 1000... 800 hz... without true sucess.
Maybe now with electronic xover you can try between 1800 and more with high order slope... maybe 1500 LR4... but I doubt !
The reviewer would keep the ESS but had something between the 12" not to waste the both drivers...IMHO. A B&G NEO 8s or NEO10.
Peace !
1,5 khz is too low because of a bump in the waterfall at 1800 to 2000 (depend on concistency during product process) and non damped movement with the polyethylen material of the ribon around 1000 than can be heard above ! Here we are not talking about impedance but breakup, airflow in the V load, and distorsions and level.
I never say it's bad tweeter, I believe it's a good tweeter not a mid tweeter. Many serious reviewers talk about 1,5k in theory but advise to beginn at 2000 and often don't like what the hear below 2200 to 2500 (depend on the concistency). In 70s' we try to stack 2 to 4 ESS to go lower than 1000... 800 hz... without true sucess.
Maybe now with electronic xover you can try between 1800 and more with high order slope... maybe 1500 LR4... but I doubt !
The reviewer would keep the ESS but had something between the 12" not to waste the both drivers...IMHO. A B&G NEO 8s or NEO10.
Peace !
ESS as manufacturer itsself uses the AMT down to 800Hz (see below); but if you think to have advanced knowledges, you should inform ESS....
The Heil Air Motion Transformer (AMT) uses a folded pleated Mylar Diaphragm of a mere 0.0005” thickness! The voice coil is a serpentine pattern of precision etched aluminum chosen for light weight and high power handling. Unlike a normal piston loudspeaker which excites the air by alternately pushing and pulling the diaphragm, the AMT displaces the air by alternately squeezing and expanding the pleats, moving the air at a very high velocity. Because the moving mass of the AMT is extremely low, and the magnetic structure very powerful, this combination results in extremely high acceleration yielding amazing transients. The AMT's low mass and high output allow for a unusually high combination of efficiency and bandwidth to be attained in a single loudspeaker. The AMT is a dipolar transducer, meaning like a real musical instrument, it creates as much sound to the front as it does to the rear, allowing for a more natural and musical ambiance to be heard in your listening room. The shape of this diaphragm allows for wide dispersion in the horizontal axis, but tightly controlled vertical dispersion. This creates a wide sound-stage while simultaneously minimizing unwanted reflections from floor and ceiling. Ess is the manufacturer of the original and still best Air Motion Transformer invented by Dr. Oskar Heil over 30 years ago. The AMT is able to efficiently reproduce frequencies over the very wide range of 500 to 20,000 Hz. The minimum recommended crossover frequency is 800 Hz at 12db/octave or more.
The Heil Air Motion Transformer (AMT) uses a folded pleated Mylar Diaphragm of a mere 0.0005” thickness! The voice coil is a serpentine pattern of precision etched aluminum chosen for light weight and high power handling. Unlike a normal piston loudspeaker which excites the air by alternately pushing and pulling the diaphragm, the AMT displaces the air by alternately squeezing and expanding the pleats, moving the air at a very high velocity. Because the moving mass of the AMT is extremely low, and the magnetic structure very powerful, this combination results in extremely high acceleration yielding amazing transients. The AMT's low mass and high output allow for a unusually high combination of efficiency and bandwidth to be attained in a single loudspeaker. The AMT is a dipolar transducer, meaning like a real musical instrument, it creates as much sound to the front as it does to the rear, allowing for a more natural and musical ambiance to be heard in your listening room. The shape of this diaphragm allows for wide dispersion in the horizontal axis, but tightly controlled vertical dispersion. This creates a wide sound-stage while simultaneously minimizing unwanted reflections from floor and ceiling. Ess is the manufacturer of the original and still best Air Motion Transformer invented by Dr. Oskar Heil over 30 years ago. The AMT is able to efficiently reproduce frequencies over the very wide range of 500 to 20,000 Hz. The minimum recommended crossover frequency is 800 Hz at 12db/octave or more.
If the manufacterer said it.... of course it's a proof !
i have no interest here and nothing to sell. Keep yours certainties... We are all going to sell ours speakers to go with an ESS AMT with an XO at 800hz LR2 (lol) or 1500hz (less lol but lol again) ! Miracle we have the mid-tweeter than everybody had not seen before and that nobody test before !
The only true fact here is that the ESS is far better than the Dayton. And you need an Electro magnet speaker to have the lower QTS and reactivity to match the ESS because of its fastness. Or a very light cone or better planar or CD. many people try it before and didn't stop to the manufacturer manuel ! Each time I heard it with a too low XO there were problems.... Theory is not reality !
Finally i think ESS AMT is a good bargain but hard to match. The OP may test too anothers ribbons or magnet speakers if 1500 or lower is really needed : Neo 8s planar (but need a tweeter above 4 khz) or an expensive Mundorf AMT (not the little one but the big one)... but the price !
IMHO of course... not my universal knowledge, just my test and the tests of some serious people (la Revue de l'Audiophile; Klang german reviews, some experiments of people here and elsewhere)
I think I will stop know to argue with you but go in peace, it's not important after all!
i have no interest here and nothing to sell. Keep yours certainties... We are all going to sell ours speakers to go with an ESS AMT with an XO at 800hz LR2 (lol) or 1500hz (less lol but lol again) ! Miracle we have the mid-tweeter than everybody had not seen before and that nobody test before !
The only true fact here is that the ESS is far better than the Dayton. And you need an Electro magnet speaker to have the lower QTS and reactivity to match the ESS because of its fastness. Or a very light cone or better planar or CD. many people try it before and didn't stop to the manufacturer manuel ! Each time I heard it with a too low XO there were problems.... Theory is not reality !
Finally i think ESS AMT is a good bargain but hard to match. The OP may test too anothers ribbons or magnet speakers if 1500 or lower is really needed : Neo 8s planar (but need a tweeter above 4 khz) or an expensive Mundorf AMT (not the little one but the big one)... but the price !
IMHO of course... not my universal knowledge, just my test and the tests of some serious people (la Revue de l'Audiophile; Klang german reviews, some experiments of people here and elsewhere)
I think I will stop know to argue with you but go in peace, it's not important after all!
Last edited:
How does the Heil AMT compare to an electrostatic panel (both theoretically and subjectively sound wise)? The diaphragm of an ESL can be as thin as 3.5 um (compared to the Heil's 12 um if my maths are correct). Which construction typically exercise the highest force per effective panel area unit, and which has the lowest distortion?
Thanks.
Thanks.
After using the Heil since the seventies, diehard heil fan here, my preference is a xo around 2800-3000hz with a second order filter. I did indeed try lower frequencies along the road. 800hz ... nah. 1200hz at lower listening levels maybe ... 1800hz ... pretty good except that some instruments, for instance a baritone sax, may sound a bit "bright" even with a forth order slope. etc etc .. on and on to where I'm at now with the xo.
To my ear that range adds just enough life to the lower 6" midrange I use, due to the shallower sloped filter, without sounding strained. Above those frequencies I find no issues. It's a unique driver for sure.
To my ear that range adds just enough life to the lower 6" midrange I use, due to the shallower sloped filter, without sounding strained. Above those frequencies I find no issues. It's a unique driver for sure.
puppet,
glad you came on this thread - there is no equal to empirical work carried out over decades, I'm also a 'good old boy'.
This will be my first (and I hope my last) speaker project, so I don't presume to pronounce but just to ask questions.
I bought a pair of Grand Heils from a mate on another forum, must be 10 years ago and never really had the chance to build OBs with them until now.
I did'nt/don't want to consider using a three-way, would much prefer a two-way using fast 15" woofers. I think I have found what I am looking for and are favoured for OB duty @100db, these woofers operate from 48hz - 4kHz. I will be using an active x/over, either a Berhinger or a Rod Elliot.
I remember reading threads some years ago which said that the Heils don't like to be enclosed and that using a 'back plate' some 10-12" behind the unit gave a better response. I would appreciate any comments on this arrangement, especially on baffle size. I should add I am going to build our own home (retired builder) and we will each have our own personal room, in my case specifically to listen to music so WAF is irrelevant. All comments welcome.
glad you came on this thread - there is no equal to empirical work carried out over decades, I'm also a 'good old boy'.
This will be my first (and I hope my last) speaker project, so I don't presume to pronounce but just to ask questions.
I bought a pair of Grand Heils from a mate on another forum, must be 10 years ago and never really had the chance to build OBs with them until now.
I did'nt/don't want to consider using a three-way, would much prefer a two-way using fast 15" woofers. I think I have found what I am looking for and are favoured for OB duty @100db, these woofers operate from 48hz - 4kHz. I will be using an active x/over, either a Berhinger or a Rod Elliot.
I remember reading threads some years ago which said that the Heils don't like to be enclosed and that using a 'back plate' some 10-12" behind the unit gave a better response. I would appreciate any comments on this arrangement, especially on baffle size. I should add I am going to build our own home (retired builder) and we will each have our own personal room, in my case specifically to listen to music so WAF is irrelevant. All comments welcome.
Black Stuart ... a two-way w/15" driver and the heil sort of puts you in "no mans land" with the xo. I view the heil much like a compression driver. As such, you'd want the hand off between the cone and heil to match polar directivity as close as possible. Both a 12" and 15" will be beaming way before you'd want to xo to the heil. Off axis response of the cone drivers will be a mess. I don't think a lot of people listen to OB on axis.
On OB, the cone driver ... even a 12" ... will need a fair bit of eq to meet the heil in its decent operating frequency range and be on a baffle large enough (with eq) to support decent bass reproduction. Not easily done. With a 15" woofer, I'd be thinking three-way.
As far as a baffled heil goes .. I don't care for it. It's more "in your face" quality is contrary to my enjoyment of the OB experience. My preference is for all the drivers to work as seamlessly as possible. The multiway systems your seeing designed lately don't push any of the drivers out of their comfort zone yielding a more natural sound as a whole. There's certainly something to be learned there.
You could go with the audax pro mid driver which is supposed to work well on OB. A 15", the audax with the heil on top would be a pretty good start for your OB mains. 3-4 ways are more work but it's a fun process. A flexible xo is also a huge help.
You could goggle "EDGE" software and experiment with that program. EDGE will give you an idea of baffle/driver size/position and how they might effect frequency response which would help in getting a grasp on realistic xo points and sane eq levels.
On OB, the cone driver ... even a 12" ... will need a fair bit of eq to meet the heil in its decent operating frequency range and be on a baffle large enough (with eq) to support decent bass reproduction. Not easily done. With a 15" woofer, I'd be thinking three-way.
As far as a baffled heil goes .. I don't care for it. It's more "in your face" quality is contrary to my enjoyment of the OB experience. My preference is for all the drivers to work as seamlessly as possible. The multiway systems your seeing designed lately don't push any of the drivers out of their comfort zone yielding a more natural sound as a whole. There's certainly something to be learned there.
You could go with the audax pro mid driver which is supposed to work well on OB. A 15", the audax with the heil on top would be a pretty good start for your OB mains. 3-4 ways are more work but it's a fun process. A flexible xo is also a huge help.
You could goggle "EDGE" software and experiment with that program. EDGE will give you an idea of baffle/driver size/position and how they might effect frequency response which would help in getting a grasp on realistic xo points and sane eq levels.
Hi puppet,
thanks for your input. The reason I bought the G/Hs off my friend was I had a chance to listen to his AMT1s, I think that was the model no. Anyway they were original ESS and had the 12"woofers and passive radiators - they sounded very good or I would'nt have bought his spare pair + original passive x/overs. These usewd as you know a 2 way x/over.
re. flexible x/overs the Behringer is just that.
I would have liked a response to the 'back plate idea', this is especially useful with transducers that are not in a box, as they have nothing to 'flex/push the sound waves against.
I do not intend to mount the G/Hs onto the baffle as there could well be interference from the woofer. It's why I think a one piece arm on a deck is a bad idea - there is nothing to stop resonances travelling through the arm to the cartridge. Sadly there is a lot of antiquated b/s still prevalent in audio most of it to make more profit for manufacturers -that was the reason that high density chipboard was abandoned for MDF in speakers cabinets, since HDC blunted cutting tools much faster than MDF.
I don't have any welding gear so will get a friend to build me a gantry so that I can effectively 'hang' the the Heils from, ergo zero interference from the woofers. This way I can alter the height and distance of the Heils from woofer.
It's why I have no fixed idea about baffle size and design. There are a few speaker designs that effectively use transducers which are mounted in a skeleton type arrangement, this experimentation is my idea of fun. It also will allow me to inter-act to best effect with the 'character' of the room.
I might just be persuaded to go 3 way but 4 way - no way, it would then get complicated and that is not for me. As you say it can be fun for some.
I could well be completely wrong about everything but as I was/ an innovative constructor whose ideas have in practice worked I'd like to give my ideas in this field a chance. I can always admit I was wrong and retrace my steps.
thanks for your input. The reason I bought the G/Hs off my friend was I had a chance to listen to his AMT1s, I think that was the model no. Anyway they were original ESS and had the 12"woofers and passive radiators - they sounded very good or I would'nt have bought his spare pair + original passive x/overs. These usewd as you know a 2 way x/over.
re. flexible x/overs the Behringer is just that.
I would have liked a response to the 'back plate idea', this is especially useful with transducers that are not in a box, as they have nothing to 'flex/push the sound waves against.
I do not intend to mount the G/Hs onto the baffle as there could well be interference from the woofer. It's why I think a one piece arm on a deck is a bad idea - there is nothing to stop resonances travelling through the arm to the cartridge. Sadly there is a lot of antiquated b/s still prevalent in audio most of it to make more profit for manufacturers -that was the reason that high density chipboard was abandoned for MDF in speakers cabinets, since HDC blunted cutting tools much faster than MDF.
I don't have any welding gear so will get a friend to build me a gantry so that I can effectively 'hang' the the Heils from, ergo zero interference from the woofers. This way I can alter the height and distance of the Heils from woofer.
It's why I have no fixed idea about baffle size and design. There are a few speaker designs that effectively use transducers which are mounted in a skeleton type arrangement, this experimentation is my idea of fun. It also will allow me to inter-act to best effect with the 'character' of the room.
I might just be persuaded to go 3 way but 4 way - no way, it would then get complicated and that is not for me. As you say it can be fun for some.
I could well be completely wrong about everything but as I was/ an innovative constructor whose ideas have in practice worked I'd like to give my ideas in this field a chance. I can always admit I was wrong and retrace my steps.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.