I might come accross a great defender of wideband drivers because ive heard the holy grail, the WE 755a in the AR-1 speaker, but anyone whos heard that driver will laugh HARD at some of you guys comment.
your experience is nada
lots of opinions though!
youve never design any speaker using a wideband.
your experience is nada
lots of opinions though!
Uh... It's funny you bring up that Acoustic Research, hardly a "modern full-range driver" since it was made back in 1954, if that's still "the holy grail" then this thread title needs to change. Also funny that Acoustic Research decided that wasn't enough, and they also started using tweeters. You'll be hard pressed to find someone that'll say the AR1 sounds better than the AR9... Wonder why the AR9 sounds better??
And FTR, I never said I've never used a wide-band, I said I've never heard one that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter.
And FTR, I never said I've never used a wide-band, I said I've never heard one that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter.
Last edited by a moderator:
For some light relief, I will mention the tweeter of the Wharfedale Denton 2.
This is an open back cone tweeter with a 1400 Hz xover freq. It has its own enclosure (tea cup sized)
After taking some of the wadding out of the "cup", I think it makes a very decent tweeter. (Same applies to the main enclosure. Too much wadding makes the sound dead.)
This is an open back cone tweeter with a 1400 Hz xover freq. It has its own enclosure (tea cup sized)
After taking some of the wadding out of the "cup", I think it makes a very decent tweeter. (Same applies to the main enclosure. Too much wadding makes the sound dead.)
https://acousticresearchspeakers.ne...kers-altec-755-a-we-loudspeakers-drivers-usa/
youve seen many people compare the Ar-1 with AR-9?
you did say you never designed a speaker using a wideband. all those great opinions of yours about drivers you never used are meaningless
Care to quote that statement? I never said that. The last full-range build I did used the Aura NS-3, with no tweeter. Regardless, I still hold to my original statement that I have never heard a full range speaker that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter.
Also to your question, no, I've personally never been in a side-by-side comparison of the AR1 and AR9 speakers. But a quick google search for "best Acoustic Research speakers" will give you your answer- the AR1 is not the answer.
Also to your question, no, I've personally never been in a side-by-side comparison of the AR1 and AR9 speakers. But a quick google search for "best Acoustic Research speakers" will give you your answer- the AR1 is not the answer.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is easy enough to look up what people prefer in listening tests. And don't forget what happened when Linkwitz was confident his dipoles were subjectively superior to conventional high fidelity speakers and offered a challenge. Nonetheless as someone that has heard a few speakers with wideband drivers and remained baffled even when in conversation with the people that had designed and built them. I have been told by enthusiasts that I simply haven't been exposed to a good speaker using a wideband driver. I know my inability to hear anything particularly attractive about speakers with wideband drivers is shared by quite a few others. If the wideband speaker community can agree on a representative design that possesses the subjectively quality of "coherence", "well sorted critical telephone band",... or whatever that is missing in a conventional multi-driver speaker then a listening test comparing the two seems like a good idea to me.
Are we to compare a single 3" wideband speaker in a complicated enclosure against a conventional 3 way midfield monitor or decent example of a 3 way tower home speaker? If not what can be done with the wideband speaker to help in the comparison while maintaining whatever a wideband driver brings. Add the tweeter and woofer but shrink their passband and reduce their crossover slopes so that the wideband driver covers substantially more than a midrange driver? Add just the woofer? Add just the tweeter? I am fairly confident of what a conventional speaker apple looks like but not the equivalent wideband driver apple. Suggestions?
Last edited:
this thread is about mid/tweet vs wideband
not about using a wideband from bass to treble.
so this discussion is about using a helper woofer + wideband, rather going the 3 way classic method with woofer-mid-treble. im using some of the most classic 3 way example as my main reference btw. but the coherency of a good wideband is obvious to my ears.
im building a speaker similar: 1st order series xo, 2 way, 300hz crossover: 12"+4" wideband: about 91db efficient.
I suspect AR-1 had to stopped using the WE 755a since it wasnt produced anymore. BTW, I dont think the AR-1 is that great due to the integration between woofer and wideband, but the experience of hearing the we755a is quite special. best mid that i have ever heard.
I guess i value experience over opinion. and all of you guys with such strong convinctions about the inferiority of wideband drivers have never designed speakers around those drivers.
not about using a wideband from bass to treble.
so this discussion is about using a helper woofer + wideband, rather going the 3 way classic method with woofer-mid-treble. im using some of the most classic 3 way example as my main reference btw. but the coherency of a good wideband is obvious to my ears.
any variation of a wideband doing 2-300hz up to 15khz with any additional helper woofers.
im building a speaker similar: 1st order series xo, 2 way, 300hz crossover: 12"+4" wideband: about 91db efficient.
youve tried a 23$ aluminium 3" wideband and didnt like it: "therefore, i suspect all of those who like wideband drivers are wrong"?
I suspect AR-1 had to stopped using the WE 755a since it wasnt produced anymore. BTW, I dont think the AR-1 is that great due to the integration between woofer and wideband, but the experience of hearing the we755a is quite special. best mid that i have ever heard.
I guess i value experience over opinion. and all of you guys with such strong convinctions about the inferiority of wideband drivers have never designed speakers around those drivers.
I kinda figured that's what you'd say. Still waiting for you to quote where I said I never used one.
So aside from the 60 year old AR driver that according to you is the holy grail of wide band drivers... Which one have you used?
Also, FTR I've also used the MA Alpair 7... Is that one good enough for you or does that fail as well? (Used that with no tweeter as well)
ive had:
fostex fe127
Alpair 12-p
fostex FE-206 in back-loaded horns
Coral beta 8
Fostex ff85k
fostex fe-108ez
various vintage phillips wideband
ref 3 a decapo (which is a wideband up to 5khz)
ive also heard at shows all the usual suspects
I never heard the alpair 7, but ive never heard a metal driver i could live with long term either.
Last edited:
If you actually used the Aura NS3 you wouldn't bash it. Who cares what it costs? It's actually a great driver regardless of price. I still stand behind what I said... I've never heard a full-range driver that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter. I guess to be transparent, I've used...
Aura NS3- phenomenal little driver, limits are... output and needs a tweeter.
MA Alpair 7- the original one, sounded amazing, limits are... output and needs a tweeter.
CSS VWR126- Another great driver... needs a tweeter
Dayton Audio RS100- Great driver... needs a tweeter
Been going to audio shows for many years, I used to go to CES in Vegas every year before the home audio show died, been going to Axpona every year since they started, and I've built more speakers than I can remember. While I never personally used one, I've heard just about every Fostex there is, haven't heard one yet that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter- not saying they're no good, just that it would benefit from a tweeter. Also heard most Mark Audio drivers (including the 50mm ones) and none of them would outperform most tweeters in the upper frequencies. Because of my experience, I always just assumed people that build using nothing but a full range driver do so because they can't design crossovers
. But to each their own.
Aura NS3- phenomenal little driver, limits are... output and needs a tweeter.
MA Alpair 7- the original one, sounded amazing, limits are... output and needs a tweeter.
CSS VWR126- Another great driver... needs a tweeter
Dayton Audio RS100- Great driver... needs a tweeter
Been going to audio shows for many years, I used to go to CES in Vegas every year before the home audio show died, been going to Axpona every year since they started, and I've built more speakers than I can remember. While I never personally used one, I've heard just about every Fostex there is, haven't heard one yet that wouldn't benefit from a tweeter- not saying they're no good, just that it would benefit from a tweeter. Also heard most Mark Audio drivers (including the 50mm ones) and none of them would outperform most tweeters in the upper frequencies. Because of my experience, I always just assumed people that build using nothing but a full range driver do so because they can't design crossovers
. But to each their own.
Both are 2-way. A mechanical XO in the whizzer cone, an XO in the coax (nneds to have time delay on the tweeter to getthem properly lined up).
dave
A 3” that does good bass (for a 3”) but the top is not great. The concave cone does not give the same HF as the more typical 18mm dome/dustcap that the best have.
BTW i have heard many good FR loudpeakers (and WAW) ruined by adding a tweeter.
dave
Completely agree about the NS3. And it would be a fun listening session with you, and I'm sincerely willing to have a reasonable debate about it. But to be fair, I've heard a lot of speakers that didn't sound very good due to bad tweeter integration, that doesn't mean tweeters are bad.
Last edited by a moderator:
I haven’t lived with the Coral, not heard the decapo. Alpair 7.3 is a very good FR. From Gen 2 on MA has reversed my opinion of metal cone drivers. And for every one of those many more.
No one has complaimed or commented (and they have been heard by many) on a lack of top with these that use the A7.3eN as midTweeter from 250Hz to over 20k. twin A12pWeN in Woden TL comfortably do 25 Hz in room.
dave
And this is the beauty of this hobby. Not saying you're wrong at all, but I don't believe I am either, I think we just prefer different speakers. Too bad you're WAY far away, I'm in Michigan, because I'd love to hear those speakers.I haven’t lived with the Coral, not heard the decapo. Alpair 7.3 is a very good FR. From Gen 2 on MA has reversed my opinion of metal cone drivers. And for every one of those many more.
No one has complaimed or commented (and they have been heard by many) on a lack of top with these that use the A7.3eN as midTweeter from 250Hz to over 20k. twin A12pWeN in Woden TL comfortably do 25 Hz in room.
dave
Also want to be perfectly clear, I never said wide-band / full-range drivers were bad to use (I actually think the MA drivers I've heard were all pretty amazing)... just saying IME, I would've put a tweeter over the ones I've heard. Maybe you guys have the magic sauce using a notch filter or something else in your xovers to draw those highs out a little better than the many I've heard in the past.
Also, having not been discussed here yet, my other issue with using a full-range driver is the lack of output. Now this could be remedied by adding a woofer to fill in below 300 Hz, and as far as I've read the "purists" here are not opposed to that, it's adding a tweeter that becomes problematic for you guys (am I correct?).
A woofer can be added and XOed at a frequency where the C-C can be kept small enuff that the drivers are coincident (ie like a coax but without the problems), ie C-C is less than a quarter-wavelength. Getting a tweeter within even a wavelength is difficult so now it matters where your head is.
dave
Last edited:
There's always a compromise somewhere in loudspeaker design. For me personally, maybe until I hear your speakers, I'll keep using conventional tweeters.
FWIW, I've actually heard the MA-Sota Viotti One speakers, and this is where I largely came to the conclusion that I enjoy a conventional tweeter more than a cone driver for high frequencies. It was my assumption that... if any cone driver could "pull it off in the upper frequencies" it would be the 50mm MA, and it just didn't deliver for me. Just my opinion.
FWIW, I've actually heard the MA-Sota Viotti One speakers, and this is where I largely came to the conclusion that I enjoy a conventional tweeter more than a cone driver for high frequencies. It was my assumption that... if any cone driver could "pull it off in the upper frequencies" it would be the 50mm MA, and it just didn't deliver for me. Just my opinion.
Last edited by a moderator:
Having been 'immersed' in various 755 apps from earliest age this is an 'apples n' oranges' comparison at best if for no other reason than the AR9 used a dedicated 1.9 cm/~0.75" dia. super tweeter for 'fill' - 'top end 'air'. Disconnecting it, leaving a 3.8 cm/~1.5" mid/tweet is a close enough 'ballpark' comparison though that in retrospect wished I'd done such when I could have, but was/am too 755 centric (especially the original FC) by then to give 'two hoots n' holler'
and really, really wished I'd had the foresight to buy/store the hundreds available (some FC) in my locale at one time for 'pennies on the dollar', but at the time didn't see a way to make enough profit from them to justify the potentially long term storage cost.
Last edited:
So are we looking at comparing something like woofer/s crossed at 300 Hz with either a conventional midrange+tweeter or a wideband driver like a Mark Audio Alpair 7.3? Or should the wideband driver be a bit smaller at 3", crossed higher, not made of metal,... Is there reasonable consensus on what is a representative good wideband driver in the community? The Alpair 7.3 is not a current driver so is the replacement the Alpair 7 MS considered by the wideband community to be better, worse or about the same?