I tried some full range drivers recently to see what all the hubbub was about. I was skeptical about many things most of which went against what I know on the engineering side. Unfortunately for the drivers my skepticism were proven to be true. They simply did not render the top in a manner that I would consider correct, beaming was quite noticeable. I did very much enjoy the mid range I heard and would love to employ a few of the ones I tried in a three way speaker. I personally do not consider full range drivers as appropriate to cover the top end, you can certainly make one that isn't to offensive but it's no replacement for a well implemented tweeter.
I had the scan speak 10f, the 4 inch dayton rs (can't recall the model off the top of my head), and a 3 1/2" tectonic bmr driver which I feel lucky to have because it's price seems to have doubled. They all sounded great in the mid range. the bmr is something else, just a wall of sound with almost no imaging which was engaging for awhile probably because it was just totally different to my ears. With all of then once cymbals and hi hats and such came in it was honestly a bit of a disaster to me. I used some corrective eq on them all at some point. I plan on using one of the models in a 3 way, probably the 10f. Sorry I didn't list models, I'm not feeling that great at the moment, hard to work up the energy to look them up or get the driver boxes out of the drawer.
I found my tests to be fun, I heard a lot of things I hadn't heard in the mid range before, but also a bit saddening as results played out as I expected. I guess I should be happy that my intuition is usually on point and thats backed up by the various research and science that I've gathered, but I'd really like to hear something truly surprising.
I found my tests to be fun, I heard a lot of things I hadn't heard in the mid range before, but also a bit saddening as results played out as I expected. I guess I should be happy that my intuition is usually on point and thats backed up by the various research and science that I've gathered, but I'd really like to hear something truly surprising.
Last edited by a moderator:
https://faitalpro.com/en/products/LF_Loudspeakers/product_details/index.php?id=401000100
https://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/295-612--dynavox-ly302f-spec-sheet.pdf
Here‘s two off the top of my head…..I own them both and did some head to head comparison as a basis for a 16 element live sound column. Both are excellent.
Coming from a position of being a realist…..I’m over 50 and can’t hear much above 13khz and I would postulate that most here are in the same boat wether they know it or not. And when i actually ‘listen’ to music for my own enjoyment and relaxation, I’ve always placed my speakers in a triangle position where the on and off axis response is most enjoyable and not fatiguing…..off axis response beyond 30 degrees is meaningless to me…..and if someone is listening more than 30 degrees off axis critically, i question their reasoning and motivations.
And I’m not surprised at all by your observations with the drivers you mention…..except the 10F…..there’s two versions….one they list as a dedicated midrange, the 2424 and the fullrange 2416? Notice from my posts I kinda accept the reality of physics so drivers beyond 3.5” in diameter begin to suffer off axis more than I care for. Those BMRs are great little micro subs and beach bopper boom box speakers….not much else.
philharmonitor seems like a popular and well received speaker that uses bmr driver.
I'll have to check the 10f model but it's the one in the fast monitor by xrk. my go to speakers are Neumann and genelec and I don't really feel any mid is going to offer the performance of those speakers tweeters.
I'll have to check the 10f model but it's the one in the fast monitor by xrk. my go to speakers are Neumann and genelec and I don't really feel any mid is going to offer the performance of those speakers tweeters.
Last edited by a moderator:
So I come from a place of the tangible on these and many topics…..so when we start talking about ‘high quality response out to 20khz’, I try and apply the rationale to real world situations that effect us wether we know it or like it.…..so let’s take Bob Clearmountain as an example( and there are many others) at nearly 70 years old who still is recording and producing legends today……test his hearing today or even 15 years ago……do you think he’d raise his hand with a 15khz test tone?
Case in point…..what you observed and perceived as a giant horn tweeter…..isn’t………it’s likely crossed to those horn loaded 15’s at 4-500hz and a likely a 4” compression driver…..playing the passband from 400hz up to 10khz where physics limits it’s ability to play much above that. There are MANY top shelf systems like that and most without the Plasma or similar super tweeter……..but this is what I’m talking about on a smaller scale that fits the lifestyle of most.
If anyone's curious, I believe this is the thread:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/10f-8424-rs225-8-fast-waw-ref-monitor.273524/
If that’s the case, I question the validity of the commentary or experience…..the 10f is +3db at 13khz on axis so hardly lacking in high frequency response. The highest fundamentals where tonality lives is 6-7khz, everything else being harmonics and Spacial reverberance (another in depth topic of contention where modern digital processing fails miserably). When someone claims their experience was lacking from a deficiency of content above 13khz and we’re actively debating the topic, I kInda feel like I’m in a casino dumping quarters into a slot machine that’s never gonna pay out……
…….and it’s usually these same folks that claim they don’t hear the phase hole created by the crossover in their existing speakers centered somewhere between 2-3khz…….yet a lack of 15khz harmonic shimmer is a deal breaker? And this IS NOT to say that the crossover phase anomalies sound objectionable……but what I am saying you just might be a candidate for some professional listening training. Problem is, most people come to this place from a position of familiarity with either their own system or content which creates an incredible bias boundary. Sit these folks down blind to both the playback device and content that is well recorded yet unfamiliar to them and the results are revelatory.
15kHz may not be the biggest thing, but it's not to be de-valued. A speaker can be fairly good without it, but fixing toward and into the top octave is needed for realistic presentation of the space. Shimmer makes it sound like there's too much of it.
When I add that ceramic dome as tweeter or super (especially with ClariCap), tonality is unchanged but the high voice sings against a halo of reverberant air, the venue no longer a homogenous void but fills out...
What is the audible contribution of >10khz toward transcient response fidelity? Theory says there is. I think (my listening correlates) 5-6khz carry perceived dynamics and 8-9khz a sense of speed -- so I'm quite wary of peaks and valleys at those frequencies. My phone recommends EQ boost even for young people.
What is the audible contribution of >10khz toward transcient response fidelity? Theory says there is. I think (my listening correlates) 5-6khz carry perceived dynamics and 8-9khz a sense of speed -- so I'm quite wary of peaks and valleys at those frequencies. My phone recommends EQ boost even for young people.
Last edited by a moderator:
We not only listen to the first arriving direct signal from the speaker. Weather we want or not, of axis signal from the speaker bounces from the walls, floor and ceiling, and other surfaces, and arrives tens of milliseconds later, providing the room information to the sound. We hear room by the of axis response. If the signal of axis has significantly different fr response than on axis, speaker is flawed and sounds fatiguing. Flat on axis and smooth of axis is desired for long term non-fatiguing listening.
The Pluvia 7HD is also in stock locally. Is this driver widely considered by the wideband driver community to be good?
Wide consensus that a good example of a wideband speaker is being compared to a conventional speaker is important if the results are to be of much relevance to both communities. Obviously from the nature of the wideband community as reflected in some of the comments in this thread there is never going to be full consensus but a wide consensus should hopefully be possible. What I prize most will be reflected in the conventional speaker with it's adequate clean SPL and controlled directivity. What matters in the wideband speaker is what the wideband community prize most which seems to be this subjective "coherence" (also known by other names) that I can neither define in scientific/engineering terms or identity from listening to examples of speakers using wideband drivers. It's presence or not in an example of a wideband speaker has to come from those that know what it is.
A frequency passband of a decade is typical of a conventional robust midrange. You don't need a delicate wideband driver for that.
In the low frequencies I was referring to using resonances to extend the low frequency SPL and/or extension with the driver resonance and/or ports, pipes, chambers,... If you were to cover down to 20 Hz with conventional drivers without using resonances a speaker would be large and costly. It would also be pointless given the presence of strong room resonances and the low level of transient information at very low frequencies with conventional music.
About fifteen years ago, some PHD student in Florida published an interesting paper that indicated that listeners couldn't easily discern between stereo tweeters and mono tweeters.
IE - you can have ONE mono tweeter in the center of two stereo speakers and people couldn't easily tell the difference.
If you think about it, this makes a lot of sense.
First off, when you have stereo speakers radiating 10khz, even the tiniest amount of offset will generate comb filtering. 10khz is 3.4cm long, which means that if you move your head just 1.7cm (0.675"), the radiation from the left speaker will cancel out the radiation from the right speaker.
The other issue is that our perception of where high frequency sounds are located is determine by frequency response, not phase. If the left speaker is 3dB louder at 10khz than the right speaker, our perception of where those sounds are coming from will veer to the left. But as noted above, simply sitting an inch or two off-center will screw up that frequency response.
Put all of that together, and you can see why a single mono tweeter may be ideal. Or if not ideal, it sounds comparable to a set of stereo tweeters.
I tried this years ago in my car stereo, and was surprised by how convincing it was.
Indeed that's the 10F 8424G00 model, they call it a midrange in advertising though the spec sheet has always said fullrange. The 10F 84124G10 is known as the Fullrange version. I don't think it would sway your opinion though. I guess we each have different expectations of how it 'should' sound.
I guess I'd have to try this one day 😀. A (super) tweeter in the middle for 10Khz+. I wonder if I could aim it up, as I'd have to hide it.
Promised the missus: no more added speakers 😀.
Edit: I actually had a lot of ideas on how to integrate tweeters into my own project. Like experimenting with tweeters aimed to the wall behind the speakers etc. I just never felt the need. A mono central tweeter could be a fun project though. I'll have to see if I still have some channels left to play with.
Oh that's not playing fair, big ribbon/AMT are array transducers, more comparable to compression-driver & horn.
My first original diy used not-small 26x50 AMT with 5.5" fiberglass honeycomb in 7L 1m TL. Sound projection reminded me of RKO (one of NY's last). Not fair.
I think the problem is there aren't enough wide/fullrange choices available in N. America and Europe, where the mainstream "hifi" has been multi-way tweeter plus the rest. Small market, no competition, little choice. Whereas in China right now, there are so many established brands with full lineups and new companies trying new tricks, it's impossible to even listen to all the audioclips. Any of my (keeper) fullrange drivers will probably do, as I don't tolerate peaky or missing HF. Alas they aren't exported.
I have been in Beijing a long time but only decided to try the pure, local fare Covid Era (2020). For $100 a whizzer 4" labyrinth from a company called AIRS. It had extension, uniform sound top-bottom, flat response, and effortless stereo imaging. Violin high and forward, piano low and further back -- I'm not sure a run-of-the-mill commercial multi-way sold in the States for under $1000 could do that, or beat the little AIRS in any category except LOUD. Its main faults are ultimate detail, refinement and excitement -- a little boring compared to my old Monitor Audio Studio or Joseph or Lowther or (too many) subsequent entries.
Coherence: An instrument (including voice) should sound like a single instrument playing its full range, at a unique location on the 3D soundstage. Well that's my take, someone please translate to something measurable. Say, similar impulse/transcient response and harmonic content regardless of note pitch (violin E-string excepted).
Last edited: