I doubt if I'm paraphrasing him accurately, but I thought I heard one notable member here observing that horn design and performance has not progressed or evolved a whole lot over many decades. But that was several years ago. OTOH, if that's largely true, and if Yamamoto is not an especially young company, it's seems somewhat strange that there have not been reasonably accurate renditions of this celebrated horn by now, as there have been with the A290, TH4001 and others. If Geddes directivity plots, and decay time waterfall plots and other measurements were available perhaps they might aide in producing a credible replica-and tested with a more reasonably priced wide range driver.
https://www.bmsspeakers.com/fileadm...1-04_coaxial_neodymium_compression_driver.pdf
Just my humble 2 cents.
A major part of the magic lies in the composition of the diaphragm.
The Japanese are masters of metallurgy.
In the highest echelons of the Japanese audio community, you will hardly find Beryllium. Why not?
A quote (from a source related to G.T. Sound):
"Beryllium does not make music."
A diaphragm with the same composition, adapted to a good large format driver (think RCF ND950) should be able to deliver 80-90% of the performance/sound quality.
Why aren't such products made by the larger manufacturers? The pro audio world does not value ultimate refinement, but is focused on max. SPL with acceptable distortion, durability, economies of scale etc.
The Japanese are masters of metallurgy.
In the highest echelons of the Japanese audio community, you will hardly find Beryllium. Why not?
A quote (from a source related to G.T. Sound):
"Beryllium does not make music."
A diaphragm with the same composition, adapted to a good large format driver (think RCF ND950) should be able to deliver 80-90% of the performance/sound quality.
Why aren't such products made by the larger manufacturers? The pro audio world does not value ultimate refinement, but is focused on max. SPL with acceptable distortion, durability, economies of scale etc.
Last edited:
Slightly less then 200k for their flagship model.
Tbh I think it's actually quite reasonable, considering the amount of handwork/sophistication.
A G.I.P. 9700A costs almost twice as much.
I think 90% of that price goes into getting the last 10% of the performance. So for much less money you can diy build a system that will sastisfy the majority of audioholics, exept for the filthy rich few.
Since they actually seem to make their own drivers as opposed to rebadging slightly customised ones from big name manufacturers, the price is indeed appropriate. However, the previous comment also holds, especially if you can dial in your diy effort according to the room.
I agree with both of you except for the "90% of the price for the last 10% of performance" part.
I think it's more like 80/20 in this case.
I think it's more like 80/20 in this case.
Yes, I've long heard praises for Japanese (Kenwood/Luxman) transformers.
I recall reading how the beryllium tweeters in the Yamaha NS1000 speakers had thrilled listeners long ago, though I never heard them. And while I've yet to hear any Beryllium compression drivers either, I know of at least one who's long enjoyed a two-way Radian Be passively crossed biradial design, and that Reddit poster (see photo above) with the Radian 950Be/JMLC 425 biamped with an NCore plate amp.
Yet that very timely quote from such an esteemed source about the musicality of Beryllium compression drivers, be they Radians or TADs, is now enough to nudge me away, at least for this first build. I just wish there were more full range non-beryllium drivers which those at this and other threads have unhesitatingly regarded as totally kickass.
BUT am I wrong or can the Yamaha 6681B (aluminum diaphragm/beryllium "finger" suspension) deliver the effortless "airy" sounding HF response I've longed to hear-even though it hardly has an extended response?
https://www.azurahorn.com/JA6681B on 425 Horn (2).pdf
But if yes, which driver out of a 2" (throat?) the BMS 4592 coaxial, RCFND950 and JBL 2450J (others??) can come closest to doing same?
Troy Crowe praised the RCFND950 across several performance parameters, though his listening tests and the end of this review finds him suggesting its use in a three-way.
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/rcf-nd950-2-0-with-es290-biradial
Or, short of that >$8K Yamamoto driver, would I have to turn to a beryllium like the Radian 745Be?
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/bms-4592nd-or-radian-950pb.2112394/
But with DSP needed for clean HF extension of the Radian Bes?
Or this? https://jblpro.com/en-US/product_documents/2450-pdf
BUT would those Japanese (Yamamoto?) designers find the titanium diaphragms in those JBL and RCF drivers also lacking musicality?
IF yes, then would you say it looks like the BMS4592 coax?
Or which still better full range drivers?
Last edited:
Given the textured, airy HF range and a “weighty” authoritative midrange which I'd ideally want achieve, it doesn’t seem affordably possible with a two-way, thoughI don’t want to risk losing the coherence and other consequences by going with a three-way.
But my builder Troy Crowe’s finished speakers are almost invariably three way, usually with Fostex super tweeters, fitted in his own low diffraction waveguides, and apparently well time aligned.
However, if instead I can now finally settle on a recommended driver for a superb sounding two-way, if not Troy’s largest if still narrowing exponential horn. https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d-cad-plans-for-es-290-biradial-horn-horn-no-1670
then what constant directivity commercially alternatives, if not these?
https://audiohorn.net/x-shape-horn/
https://audiohorn.net/next-gen-bi-radial-horn/
If not those biradials, are symmetrical horns therefore a better choice, if yes, which?
But my builder Troy Crowe’s finished speakers are almost invariably three way, usually with Fostex super tweeters, fitted in his own low diffraction waveguides, and apparently well time aligned.
However, if instead I can now finally settle on a recommended driver for a superb sounding two-way, if not Troy’s largest if still narrowing exponential horn. https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d-cad-plans-for-es-290-biradial-horn-horn-no-1670
then what constant directivity commercially alternatives, if not these?
https://audiohorn.net/x-shape-horn/
https://audiohorn.net/next-gen-bi-radial-horn/
If not those biradials, are symmetrical horns therefore a better choice, if yes, which?
Last edited:
This is a NOS diaphragm for the JBL 375:
You can spot the surface structure. The 'alloy' is probably very similar, if not identical, to what Jim Lansing used to 'form' (with his finger!) the diaphragms of the 284E for the Shearer Horn.
This is a Japanese Duraluminium remake, similar to the diaphragms of the 594A: lighter, stronger, BETTER:
But this diaphragm won't reach 24 kHz, certainly not without major 'issues'. So something more refined is needed.
You can spot the surface structure. The 'alloy' is probably very similar, if not identical, to what Jim Lansing used to 'form' (with his finger!) the diaphragms of the 284E for the Shearer Horn.
This is a Japanese Duraluminium remake, similar to the diaphragms of the 594A: lighter, stronger, BETTER:
But this diaphragm won't reach 24 kHz, certainly not without major 'issues'. So something more refined is needed.
I don't find a 25watt 4" ultra thin aluminum diaphragm with a titanium surround particularly "magical".
The titanium surround does eliminate the usual stress cracks failure mode of an all-aluminum construction like in the 1954 JBL 375 (later rebadged as 2440 and 2441) when used near rated power with a 500Hz crossover.
Perhaps because the trade off of a bit of low frequency response for a bit more high frequency makes no sense for an aging population that can afford to buy boutique versions of early 1950 designs?
Or perhaps they don't want to be associated with something introduced by companies as plebeian as Yamaha or Pioneer Electronics?
I could find dozens of quotes touting the musical advantages of beryllium, (or carbon fiber, or other plastics) but won't bother.
Would need to increase the RCF ND950's Bl from 17.6 to 20 and double the back chamber volume to get there.
A 25 watt 4" diaphragm driver with only 110dB 1w/1m sensitivity simply can't produce the SPL expected in the larger venues in the pro audio world , and a 80mm long-throat driver with a 2" throat exit doesn't fit the current paradigm for horn design.
Companies like RCF or B&C could make 1950's throwback drivers equivalent to the GSU-DO4R, but it would be hard to convince buyers to pay the prices G.T. Sound can charge.
Art
Art, I agree with some of the comments, but I think your view of Japanese (audio) culture is somewhat reductionist.
Not to imply that I fully embrace the 'Japanese school', but I like to be inspired by it.
There's a reason why many Japanese masters and pressings are so sought after.
Not to imply that I fully embrace the 'Japanese school', but I like to be inspired by it.
There's a reason why many Japanese masters and pressings are so sought after.
Last edited:
17.6 N/A with the enlarged back chamber + custom aluminum composite diaphragm should suffice to achieve at least 80% of the GSU-D04R's performance and, more importantly, its sonic signature.
Hello
I seen that said many times. I think that people can get too hung up on the differences. Yes there are measurable differences especially in the time domain. The frequency domain can be EQ'd to be identical not so the time domain. You can't EQ out resonances and break-up all of which will show up in a CSD and ETC.
I would look for well behaved CSD regardless of the material used. I wouldn't pick a driver based on just diaphragm material as there are so many other issues like throat size, horn's waveguides available and so on.
Rob 🙂
Comparisons between Aluminum, Titanium and Beryllium.
Rob 🙂
Rob 🙂
FWIW, one horn designer said of Radian drivers that the phase plugs are outdated, and the Be diaphragms are embossed.
For now, assuming that entire statement is untrue, for those wishing to use Radian Be drivers, I found this from Docali about the assembly issues that caused an unnecessary response peak. Luckily, he was able to banish by somehow reseating (?) the diaphragm. Also, what is the felt inside used for and why was it missing? Seems all pretty careless of Radian designers. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/18-sound-nd3st-compression-driver.300974/page-3 post 41. But I'm very sure that Pierre caught those oversights with his build.
So GT Sound claims that their horn can do 500-24kHz, +/-3db I think. The obvious questions then are:
- Are they implying that the CD doesn’t enter breakup before 24khz? It is not intuitive to me that this is physically possible. is it not necessary to keep a CD away from its breakup region in order to achieve the best sound money can buy?
-what db can they safely achieve at 500hz?
Unless I am missing something on the site I couldn't find a single measurement. Without measurements to back it up I would count the claims as marketing and be skeptical about those claims. If there are measurements I missed can someone post a link?
Rob 🙂
This article has been cited many times since it was first published.
People tend to (sometimes blindly) trust science.
If you delve into Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and increasingly Chinese audio culture, it becomes clear that it is often people at the top of the technical/scientific/industrial pyramid who have become 'aware' of the fact that audio (reproduction) is inherently chaotic and subjective quality is largely dominated by non-linear phenomena.
You often come across subjective terminology in which 'feeling' plays an important role.
Behind the remark that 'Beryllium and Titanium (I forgot the latter) do not make music' lies a universe of profound knowledge that touches more on the fundamental electro-mechano-acoustical domains than most people in the West seem to realize.
But because this is mainly a subjective path, it may not be shared by everyone.
What makes the G.T. Sound loudspeaker rather special imho is their integrated/holistic design, which ultimately leads to products with a rare 'coherence'.