Has anyone compared the TW025A20 vs the TW025A20Mg, so titanium dome vs magnesium dome, same motor and suspension?
The tweeter is definitely on my purchase list as it shares many design properties with Bliesma T25A that I very like.
TLHP france offers TW025A20 for 105.-€ and TW025A20Mg for 120.-€, so not much difference I would care for.
Ti standard version seems to have good reputation and I could find some measurements that show at least no flaws.
Somehow the Mg version tickles me, but could not find any measurements or opinions on the web for it.
I just fear the Mg might be somehow worse and I should just stick tho the Ti dome?
Any comment is appreciated, thanks!
Best regards
Peter
The tweeter is definitely on my purchase list as it shares many design properties with Bliesma T25A that I very like.
TLHP france offers TW025A20 for 105.-€ and TW025A20Mg for 120.-€, so not much difference I would care for.
Ti standard version seems to have good reputation and I could find some measurements that show at least no flaws.
Somehow the Mg version tickles me, but could not find any measurements or opinions on the web for it.
I just fear the Mg might be somehow worse and I should just stick tho the Ti dome?
Any comment is appreciated, thanks!
Best regards
Peter
I haven't listened both but in the french forums, the oem Mg is always talked as an upgrade, Ti is harsher. Mg is résolved and smooth at the same time I readed. Kinelac makes good q/p loudspeakers but is confidentialit french brand that uses the good Audax lines, Woven carbon for the lows, aerogel for the mid, etc.
Of course whatever the choice audax Chambers are not good enough to make Lowish cut offs. Some have climbing highs like the A26, maybe à good thing when aging...i mean our ears !
I remember @profiguy liked the A26 golden Al. But seems there is an un concistency about measurement from a source to another.
Of course whatever the choice audax Chambers are not good enough to make Lowish cut offs. Some have climbing highs like the A26, maybe à good thing when aging...i mean our ears !
I remember @profiguy liked the A26 golden Al. But seems there is an un concistency about measurement from a source to another.
Last edited:
Take of course all of this with a grain of salt, as I am always at the basic of knowing what I prefer myself ! Just wanted to help by reporting what I have readed and you have maybe no easy access (french hifi litterature).
Profiguy should have a real world experience with at least the A26 and the first silk dome ones that were used a lot everywhere times ago.
Audax is worth to consider if you are using highish cut offs only (so with your 4" for instance or with mid domes).
Now how it compete with a TAF 22 TAC hybrid or a SBACOUSTICS metal dome in a good WG from augerpro is certainly to consider and of course as you know a designing choice I am hardy ablee to choose myself (and anyway can not try all).
Imo the Mg is tempting because the quality of his dome and the Neo magnet, just have to know it's a 3 Khz beginning crosss over because of the highish Fs. (same motor than the Ti and Al line)
Profiguy should have a real world experience with at least the A26 and the first silk dome ones that were used a lot everywhere times ago.
Audax is worth to consider if you are using highish cut offs only (so with your 4" for instance or with mid domes).
Now how it compete with a TAF 22 TAC hybrid or a SBACOUSTICS metal dome in a good WG from augerpro is certainly to consider and of course as you know a designing choice I am hardy ablee to choose myself (and anyway can not try all).
Imo the Mg is tempting because the quality of his dome and the Neo magnet, just have to know it's a 3 Khz beginning crosss over because of the highish Fs. (same motor than the Ti and Al line)
Thanks for the hints!
Yes I plan to pair the Audax with the Kartesian Mid120_vHE I already have, xover around 2,5-3kHz LR4.
I further had a look at the material parameters of titanium and magnesium:
Material; Young's Modulus; Density
Mg; 45 GPa; 1,74 g/cm³
Ti; 110 GPa 4,5 g/cm³
As the area moment of inertia (* Young's Moulus = Stiffness) of such dome shape is dependent on the thickness power of four (at least as I remember), the Mg dome can be made lighter. Stiffness and so thickness and so weight of the Ti must be larger sized to achieve same breakup frequency, and/or dome height must be sized higher for better stiffness (as it seems to be the case by looking at the pics at TLHP website). Seems also as Mg is said to have "better damping of cone breakup resonance" does come from more optimal ratio between material parameters that leads to a lower Q of the spring-mass system at breakup (so it is not "inner damping" of the materials, which is very low in metals).
Does that make sense somehow why the Mg can be better than the Ti dome (if everything was engineered right)?
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/br...-8-ohm-1-inch-voice-coil-3-94-inch-front.html
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/br...-8-ohm-1-inch-voice-coil-3-94-inch-front.html
Yes I plan to pair the Audax with the Kartesian Mid120_vHE I already have, xover around 2,5-3kHz LR4.
I further had a look at the material parameters of titanium and magnesium:
Material; Young's Modulus; Density
Mg; 45 GPa; 1,74 g/cm³
Ti; 110 GPa 4,5 g/cm³
As the area moment of inertia (* Young's Moulus = Stiffness) of such dome shape is dependent on the thickness power of four (at least as I remember), the Mg dome can be made lighter. Stiffness and so thickness and so weight of the Ti must be larger sized to achieve same breakup frequency, and/or dome height must be sized higher for better stiffness (as it seems to be the case by looking at the pics at TLHP website). Seems also as Mg is said to have "better damping of cone breakup resonance" does come from more optimal ratio between material parameters that leads to a lower Q of the spring-mass system at breakup (so it is not "inner damping" of the materials, which is very low in metals).
Does that make sense somehow why the Mg can be better than the Ti dome (if everything was engineered right)?
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/br...-8-ohm-1-inch-voice-coil-3-94-inch-front.html
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/br...-8-ohm-1-inch-voice-coil-3-94-inch-front.html
Mg : better loss (internal damping) ? Al should be the king but the Be material that push higher the ringings and has a better ratio stifness/internal loss.
Ti that is the harder (? but Be at iso mass/volume) should rings more. Some Ti diaphragms are plastified to allow some surface damping...
So it is always the ration stifness/internal loss that matters.
To add to this Ti as Mg must have some shelac on it to prevent the rusting behavior....
What always surprised me is whatever some materials have different mass, at the end you see at iso size all the dome tweeter are 0.3 to 0.4 g... and strangly often the 0.4 g are sounding better as if the weigth (so stifness somewhere) matters.
What can matter is how is made the dome related to the voice coil. Imagine the Ti if made from a standalone part from the coil to the dome (so wounded directly on the voice coil) : You have now a different break-up behavior and the dome acts as well as a heat radiator. Theorically less compression and better stifness. Now how these are related above theory in a better sound is anothjer story ! When filtering passive anyway the choice of the cap matters more and can be heard.
Ti that is the harder (? but Be at iso mass/volume) should rings more. Some Ti diaphragms are plastified to allow some surface damping...
So it is always the ration stifness/internal loss that matters.
To add to this Ti as Mg must have some shelac on it to prevent the rusting behavior....
What always surprised me is whatever some materials have different mass, at the end you see at iso size all the dome tweeter are 0.3 to 0.4 g... and strangly often the 0.4 g are sounding better as if the weigth (so stifness somewhere) matters.
What can matter is how is made the dome related to the voice coil. Imagine the Ti if made from a standalone part from the coil to the dome (so wounded directly on the voice coil) : You have now a different break-up behavior and the dome acts as well as a heat radiator. Theorically less compression and better stifness. Now how these are related above theory in a better sound is anothjer story ! When filtering passive anyway the choice of the cap matters more and can be heard.
Last edited:
Mg; 45 GPa; 1,74 g/cm³
Ti; 110 GPa 4,5 g/cm³
Be; 300GPa; 1,85 g/cm³
Al; 70GPa; 2,7 g/cm³
Diamond; 1000 GPa; 3,5 g/cm³
Ranking: (sqrt(sqrt(Young's Modulus)) / Density)
2,41 Beryllium
1,61 Diamond
1,49 Magnesium
1,07 Aluminum
0,72 Titanium
Seem that I'll buy the TW025A20Mg...
Ti; 110 GPa 4,5 g/cm³
Be; 300GPa; 1,85 g/cm³
Al; 70GPa; 2,7 g/cm³
Diamond; 1000 GPa; 3,5 g/cm³
Ranking: (sqrt(sqrt(Young's Modulus)) / Density)
2,41 Beryllium
1,61 Diamond
1,49 Magnesium
1,07 Aluminum
0,72 Titanium
Seem that I'll buy the TW025A20Mg...
A while ago, I bought some A26 Mg dome asys to swap into the gold Ti dome TW025A28. It didn't measure any different except for a small variation in sensitivity. The faceplates are slightly different from the A28 to the A26, so that could have accounted for the discrepancies I observed.
The FR with the Mg alloy dome wasn't as smooth as with the Ti dome and the breakup on the Mg dome was wider spread, slightly higher up, compared to the TI being mainly just one big peak, but higher in amplitude.
Both domes overall sounded very close and I had a difficult time trying to define which I was listening to in a blind test. There was a very small improvement in smoothness with the Mg dome up top which was audible on some types of music, but it sounded a little less detailed and pinpointed in imaging depth.
I wouldn't go out of my way to switch to the Mg alloy dome. I sold the replacement domes soon after trying the swap, having several pairs of Audax TW025 series tweeters. Its wasn't worth the hassle, unless you don't take to the Ti sound, which to me is a bit more vivid IMO.
The main reason why I stuck with the Ti domes was due to the LCR I used to treat the upper breakup peak. I would have had to change the LCR values to accommodate the different dome material, so it didn't make sense in my situation. If I would do it all over again, I may choose the Mg alloy dome being smoother with most modern recordings. It gives the HF a lower likelihood to become fatiguing over longer time periods of listening.
The entire range of TW025A series tweeters with neo motors sounds excellent. Even the silk version is great, having more detail up top than most other 25mm domes. They don't do well with lower crossover points unless using an LCR on the main Fs peak. The only other silk dome that is close to the Audax silk domes is the Morel CAT308 and (WG loaded) CAT378. These are excellent soft domes in any guise and can deliver ALOT of dynamics with relatively low and shallow HP filters.
The step up from these would be the TSCT1044/1104, likely the best smaller soft domes I've ever heard and worked with. The pink elephant of the 19 - 28mm soft dome world are the Seas 22TAF/G. These are amazing being a wide surround, metal dome hybrid. IMO its the best sounding bargain tweeter under $75 and its perfect for mating with <=2 inch mid soft domes. I wouldn't cross it under 3k but it has predominantly 2nd order HD, so its not so rough sounding if used a little lower than normal.
The FR with the Mg alloy dome wasn't as smooth as with the Ti dome and the breakup on the Mg dome was wider spread, slightly higher up, compared to the TI being mainly just one big peak, but higher in amplitude.
Both domes overall sounded very close and I had a difficult time trying to define which I was listening to in a blind test. There was a very small improvement in smoothness with the Mg dome up top which was audible on some types of music, but it sounded a little less detailed and pinpointed in imaging depth.
I wouldn't go out of my way to switch to the Mg alloy dome. I sold the replacement domes soon after trying the swap, having several pairs of Audax TW025 series tweeters. Its wasn't worth the hassle, unless you don't take to the Ti sound, which to me is a bit more vivid IMO.
The main reason why I stuck with the Ti domes was due to the LCR I used to treat the upper breakup peak. I would have had to change the LCR values to accommodate the different dome material, so it didn't make sense in my situation. If I would do it all over again, I may choose the Mg alloy dome being smoother with most modern recordings. It gives the HF a lower likelihood to become fatiguing over longer time periods of listening.
The entire range of TW025A series tweeters with neo motors sounds excellent. Even the silk version is great, having more detail up top than most other 25mm domes. They don't do well with lower crossover points unless using an LCR on the main Fs peak. The only other silk dome that is close to the Audax silk domes is the Morel CAT308 and (WG loaded) CAT378. These are excellent soft domes in any guise and can deliver ALOT of dynamics with relatively low and shallow HP filters.
The step up from these would be the TSCT1044/1104, likely the best smaller soft domes I've ever heard and worked with. The pink elephant of the 19 - 28mm soft dome world are the Seas 22TAF/G. These are amazing being a wide surround, metal dome hybrid. IMO its the best sounding bargain tweeter under $75 and its perfect for mating with <=2 inch mid soft domes. I wouldn't cross it under 3k but it has predominantly 2nd order HD, so its not so rough sounding if used a little lower than normal.
That's what I planned when having more time with the 22 TAF/G and two NE149W in a MMT if a MT alone is too much anemic or if I can't cross one only at 200 K hz 12 dB because too much of noise there (I suspect one will be enough as I don't listen too much loud. SB32RNX sealed to theorically avoid a Linkwitz if taking the RNX-L version (which I would prefer to have a littlier bass cabinet and I'd prefer to stay passive also for monney or a too much complex passive)
Thanks for the tips profiguy, you should had a good fun to benchmark the Audax with the TAF/G >= 3 K hz. I know some went uo to 1900 K hz with the TAF/G, I'd resist to go below 2k5 hz. The c to c with the Audax will rule the crosssover. But just can not make saw dust or take mic measurements these days at home for the moment (project begunn maybe 2 years ago, ahaha , that's the drivers that take the dust on my shelves !)
Thanks for the tips profiguy, you should had a good fun to benchmark the Audax with the TAF/G >= 3 K hz. I know some went uo to 1900 K hz with the TAF/G, I'd resist to go below 2k5 hz. The c to c with the Audax will rule the crosssover. But just can not make saw dust or take mic measurements these days at home for the moment (project begunn maybe 2 years ago, ahaha , that's the drivers that take the dust on my shelves !)
I've discovered that many ring radiator and large surround dome tweeters don't like to go that low compared to standard size/ratio surrounded domes. I believe it has to do with the increased rocking motion on the dome from the larger suspension. The increase in H2 isn't so bad, but often H3 follows the trend, although not to the same pace of increase as the H2. The XT25 ring radiator is a good example of this. Its a nice sounding tweeter in a WG, but not very forgiving as in the original non WG form.
If we study some of the larger domes, the trend is to use smaller roll surrounds on these single suspension drivers. You tend to loose uniform piston motion control on larger width surrounds (just like with the tweeters I described). Its not severe at lower SPLs or higher HP filter points, but it will define the HD spectrum based character of the driver. Thats why the larger domes ie. Volt and ATC use a double suspension like a cone driver. It keeps the HD lower at larger excursion, lower crossover points.
If we study some of the larger domes, the trend is to use smaller roll surrounds on these single suspension drivers. You tend to loose uniform piston motion control on larger width surrounds (just like with the tweeters I described). Its not severe at lower SPLs or higher HP filter points, but it will define the HD spectrum based character of the driver. Thats why the larger domes ie. Volt and ATC use a double suspension like a cone driver. It keeps the HD lower at larger excursion, lower crossover points.
@diyiggy The 22TAF/G would be a good combo with the NE149W. Dont be fooled by this little cone midbass. It can deliver alot of outout thermally at a slightly higher HP. It will take 100W average in a small enclosure.
The trick is not putting it in too large of an enclosure when used as a dedicated mid. Overlapping the enclosure F-3 with the HP F-3 gets you a 4th order acoustic slope. Thats a "free" 12 dB/oct which saves you passive crossover parts, which at those lover frequencies aren't cheap due to needing larger values.
The NE189 would actually do better as a midbass due to its longer xmax and bigger cone area. There's only a minor 4.5k notch needed to makes it flat in a larger baffle, so its a good candidate for a 2 way. It can easily cross at 3k from a breakup perspective, although it rolls off a littler early having a 7" cone. I've built a few improvised 2 ways with the NE180 along with the Morel CAT378 crossed at 3k. The midbass is pristine and full. It delivers alot of nuances with both male and female vocals. The NE149 does better with female vocals, but not by much.
Getting back to the Audax metal domes - the TW025A28 is still my favorite. The sensitivity is excellent while having very low H3/H4. They do all that without any physical dampening media, which I find astounding. Its not cheap, but its worth the cost if you want some of the best sounding HF from a small metal dome. I'd rate it equal to the T25A and close to the T25B. At crossovers above 3k, this is THE tweeter to use. I'd say the same for the Mg alloy dome A26, although its a hair warmer in the upper mids. There are subtle differences on these Audax metal domes due to the faceplate design, but between the A20 and A28 there's almost no discernable difference. I'd say the A20 looks a little more understated than the gold bling A28. I have a set of A20 replacement domes which I swapped into the A28 and there was no obvious difference to my ears, even less so than with the Mg alloy A26.
The trick is not putting it in too large of an enclosure when used as a dedicated mid. Overlapping the enclosure F-3 with the HP F-3 gets you a 4th order acoustic slope. Thats a "free" 12 dB/oct which saves you passive crossover parts, which at those lover frequencies aren't cheap due to needing larger values.
The NE189 would actually do better as a midbass due to its longer xmax and bigger cone area. There's only a minor 4.5k notch needed to makes it flat in a larger baffle, so its a good candidate for a 2 way. It can easily cross at 3k from a breakup perspective, although it rolls off a littler early having a 7" cone. I've built a few improvised 2 ways with the NE180 along with the Morel CAT378 crossed at 3k. The midbass is pristine and full. It delivers alot of nuances with both male and female vocals. The NE149 does better with female vocals, but not by much.
Getting back to the Audax metal domes - the TW025A28 is still my favorite. The sensitivity is excellent while having very low H3/H4. They do all that without any physical dampening media, which I find astounding. Its not cheap, but its worth the cost if you want some of the best sounding HF from a small metal dome. I'd rate it equal to the T25A and close to the T25B. At crossovers above 3k, this is THE tweeter to use. I'd say the same for the Mg alloy dome A26, although its a hair warmer in the upper mids. There are subtle differences on these Audax metal domes due to the faceplate design, but between the A20 and A28 there's almost no discernable difference. I'd say the A20 looks a little more understated than the gold bling A28. I have a set of A20 replacement domes which I swapped into the A28 and there was no obvious difference to my ears, even less so than with the Mg alloy A26.
These two would make a great pair. If you cropped the sides of the 22TAF, it would go great with the DSM50FFL. They both have similar acoustic traits and would blend well.
That's the Visaton or the Dayton ? Some complained the Dayton had poor concistency from a batch to another : sometimes flat as the datasheet, but sometimes not...
I will try with the NE149W a high pass at 300 HZ but wantto stay 12 dB if possible max electrical, so here the SB34RNX coulld be not quiet enough, hence my plan to have two NE149X in a MMT conf to have more Sd and cut lower (150/200 Hz)... Have th etemptation to sacrifice the sensivity and try them open back as well...
okay off topic, here ! Thanks profiguy for the good advices as usual ! 👍
I will try with the NE149W a high pass at 300 HZ but wantto stay 12 dB if possible max electrical, so here the SB34RNX coulld be not quiet enough, hence my plan to have two NE149X in a MMT conf to have more Sd and cut lower (150/200 Hz)... Have th etemptation to sacrifice the sensivity and try them open back as well...
okay off topic, here ! Thanks profiguy for the good advices as usual ! 👍
@diyiggy That's the DSM50FFL. Aside from them not matching in TSPs, its the best 2" metal mid dome I've listened to. The Dayton is always inconsistent and usually further apart in tolerances than the Visaton (which i believe isn't normal, even on these newer design ones). You can stay in the loop on those over in the dome mid thread. The biggest issue with the Dayton dome is the breakup wandering off axis, making it hard to deal with passively using an LCR. Crossing it lower would help this, but defeats the purpose being a 2" dome which could by design cross higher.
The Visaton DSM25FFL would be interesting to try, but I also wouldn't cross it too low. The Audax TW025A28 should be happy crossing anywhere above 3.5k when paired with the Visaton. It would do extremely well dynamically and easily keep up, especially with top end heavy material. The Seas 27TBFC/G and the 27TBCF/GB WGed version would both be great candidates for a metal HF domes, but they're not quite as good as the Audax. Im not a fan of the excessive use of plastic on $100+ tweeters. All the Audax models use aluminum face plates and have higher sensitivity than the others.
The SB26ADC is a bargain for what it does. IMO, its main issue is the lower sensitivity being a 4 ohm tweeter and a little weirdness around 5k. It does have impedance control, which is a big plus. Not bad for a $55 tweeter.
In the end, I still prefer the TW025A28 when paired with a metal dome mid.
The Visaton DSM25FFL would be interesting to try, but I also wouldn't cross it too low. The Audax TW025A28 should be happy crossing anywhere above 3.5k when paired with the Visaton. It would do extremely well dynamically and easily keep up, especially with top end heavy material. The Seas 27TBFC/G and the 27TBCF/GB WGed version would both be great candidates for a metal HF domes, but they're not quite as good as the Audax. Im not a fan of the excessive use of plastic on $100+ tweeters. All the Audax models use aluminum face plates and have higher sensitivity than the others.
The SB26ADC is a bargain for what it does. IMO, its main issue is the lower sensitivity being a 4 ohm tweeter and a little weirdness around 5k. It does have impedance control, which is a big plus. Not bad for a $55 tweeter.
In the end, I still prefer the TW025A28 when paired with a metal dome mid.
I really like the 025A28 to!
Have a spair pair of diaphragm to.