Wanted also to copy that from Zaph : Notes: all of the 3/4" models have very little off axis droop. You can see the differences between a full dome, phase plug and 3/8" horn loading on the Dayton model. The Seas 27TBFCG has a clear plastic phase shield under the hexagrid, which vastly improves off axis response for a 1" dome. Obviously, when you listen to a tall ribbon, you might want to sit down and not move. The 3" full range is thrown into this comparison for good measure.
The importance of top octave response is highly overrated. It has absolutely nothing to do with sound quality, and everything to do with flexibility of placement. Simply, all it means is that you might want to toe larger drivers inwards. I say "might" because the usefulness of a response that's flat out to 20kHz is also overrated. While a peak at 10kHz is easily heard, (tape hiss anyone?) a few dB down at 10kHz is barely audible, and in some cases preferable. At the very top end, 15dB down at 20kHz is barely audible if at all. This is probably why many people don't mind tweeters like the Dayton RS28 or the many of the Morels, such as the MDT20. Dips in response at the extremes of audibility simply aren't very audible, even for those who still have clinically proven hearing out to 20kHz. (I'm good to about 17kHz in my old age)
System power response at and below the crossover is much more important than top octave off axis response. This is something to keep in mind with 3/4" tweeters that require substantially higher crossover points. Horizontal response may not be so bad, with only a mild null to deal with based on the woofer's diameter induced rolloff, but the vertical off axis response can have deep nulls that set in at a shallow angle if the crossover point is relatively high. What's not obvious to many folks is that vertical off axis nulls are still audible on axis. That's pretty much what power response is all about, and why it exists as a valuable measurement.
The most important criteria in selecting a tweeter is the harmonic distortion on the low end near the crossover point. This is the most audible defining characteristic of a tweeter, more so than top octave frequency response. System power response, while critical at the crossover point, becomes a non-issue higher in frequency. This is simply because the room plays less of a roll in the reflection of high frequencies back to the listening position. There is a lot of high frequency absorbtion in typical room construction, and even painted drywall almost completely absorbs a 15kHz tone. So, as I mentioned above, if you can toe in a system using a larger tweeter, all is well. If this article sounds a little biased against 3/4" dome tweeters, that's because it is. In most cases, I see absolutely no reason to use a 3/4" tweeter, particularly with larger woofers. The only 3/4" tweeters I've used on this web site were selected based on cost and the fact that the mid/woofer used with it was small and had a very extended response. Maybe someday someone will create a 3/4" dome that can hang with the 1" boys at the low end, but for now it doesn't exist
This is what I wanted Something like a Trynergy or a compression driver to avoid the issues of crossover above the 1500 Hz (here not for CtC but more because the M-F sensivity ears aera)! But both having some issues : non linearity with a compression 1" unit and lacke of good high polar pattern if more than a 1" Sd in a horn or not ! So the idea (maybe bad ?) to make the XO point higher but having more Sd for a wider quasi FR driver !
I liked also the input of Troels Gravsen when using large treble dome like the Audax or Seas !
My idea is also : should be easier not to waste the filter with matching domes ?
The importance of top octave response is highly overrated. It has absolutely nothing to do with sound quality, and everything to do with flexibility of placement. Simply, all it means is that you might want to toe larger drivers inwards. I say "might" because the usefulness of a response that's flat out to 20kHz is also overrated. While a peak at 10kHz is easily heard, (tape hiss anyone?) a few dB down at 10kHz is barely audible, and in some cases preferable. At the very top end, 15dB down at 20kHz is barely audible if at all. This is probably why many people don't mind tweeters like the Dayton RS28 or the many of the Morels, such as the MDT20. Dips in response at the extremes of audibility simply aren't very audible, even for those who still have clinically proven hearing out to 20kHz. (I'm good to about 17kHz in my old age)
System power response at and below the crossover is much more important than top octave off axis response. This is something to keep in mind with 3/4" tweeters that require substantially higher crossover points. Horizontal response may not be so bad, with only a mild null to deal with based on the woofer's diameter induced rolloff, but the vertical off axis response can have deep nulls that set in at a shallow angle if the crossover point is relatively high. What's not obvious to many folks is that vertical off axis nulls are still audible on axis. That's pretty much what power response is all about, and why it exists as a valuable measurement.
The most important criteria in selecting a tweeter is the harmonic distortion on the low end near the crossover point. This is the most audible defining characteristic of a tweeter, more so than top octave frequency response. System power response, while critical at the crossover point, becomes a non-issue higher in frequency. This is simply because the room plays less of a roll in the reflection of high frequencies back to the listening position. There is a lot of high frequency absorbtion in typical room construction, and even painted drywall almost completely absorbs a 15kHz tone. So, as I mentioned above, if you can toe in a system using a larger tweeter, all is well. If this article sounds a little biased against 3/4" dome tweeters, that's because it is. In most cases, I see absolutely no reason to use a 3/4" tweeter, particularly with larger woofers. The only 3/4" tweeters I've used on this web site were selected based on cost and the fact that the mid/woofer used with it was small and had a very extended response. Maybe someday someone will create a 3/4" dome that can hang with the 1" boys at the low end, but for now it doesn't exist
This is what I wanted Something like a Trynergy or a compression driver to avoid the issues of crossover above the 1500 Hz (here not for CtC but more because the M-F sensivity ears aera)! But both having some issues : non linearity with a compression 1" unit and lacke of good high polar pattern if more than a 1" Sd in a horn or not ! So the idea (maybe bad ?) to make the XO point higher but having more Sd for a wider quasi FR driver !
I liked also the input of Troels Gravsen when using large treble dome like the Audax or Seas !
My idea is also : should be easier not to waste the filter with matching domes ?
Ah ! Ok for Polar Patern inputt 🙁 ! If the CSD is very short (below 2 ms in the low end of the 3" dome : it's a trade off I could live with 🙂)
Beware about bicone, none are real fullrangers. You have 2 cones with 2 different polar patterns and a mechanical xover in between . Inspect a trully honnest measurement of this kind of speaker and think twice before spending money on such a cubist piece of art...
Btw, if you plan to go active, simply use drivers close to their pistonic ranges, the rest being freaky adventures for audio desperados.
Last edited:
Yes, it was a brillant piece of spanish humour, you didn't pick, no problem though...😉
When i get tired of messing with Waveguides/Horns/Bocinas/Trompetasdelamuerte, i will give another try to these 2' domes.
Last edited:
Oh no I didn't mean that domes would be *worse* for polar pattern than cones, only that they don't offer any wider dispersion as this is dictated by the radiating area.
A 2" dome *appears* to have narrower dispersion than a 2" cone though, because the dome has actually 2" diameter radiating, but the woofer is less (once you subtract the surround, etc).
They don't keep it in stock any more. It is probably not popular enough to satisfy the minimum order quantity from Tang Band.
I think there is an asian OEM that copied the D52 because during the late 90s and early 2000s an Australian Electronics chain sold exactly the same driver under their own branding and I have a pair. Dayton must buy from the same OEM and relabel it with their own branding. Now there is the DC50FA-8 which is as far as i'm aware the same driver again just with 4 mounting holes instead of 3.
The copy motor seems to have the same proportions as the real D52, but i'm not sure if performance differs because I don't have a real D52 to test. The main difference seems to be that the dome and/or rear chamber on the copy are not as well behaved as the real thing if the Dyn datasheet is to be believed. The DC50F has a reflection/resonance issue between 1-2kHz probably caused by the reflection off the back wall of the chamber and the dome breakup is a little higher from 5-10kHz. The Q is no where near as low on the copy either.
D52AF:
http://www.gattiweb.com/images/dynaudio/d52af_data.pdf
DC50FA-8 / DC50F-8:
http://www.daytonaudio.com/specs/specsheet.php?prod=285-015
My attempt at a waveguide to lower non-linear distortion of the DC50F-8:
DIY audio: what are you building? - Page 68 - DIY Audio Projects - StereoNET
Last edited:
Thanks Face and TMM. I have the D52AF and I am positive there is
no breakup in the passband due to cavity resonance. I'll see in the near
future if I can make a set of measurements to compare with original
datasheet.
no breakup in the passband due to cavity resonance. I'll see in the near
future if I can make a set of measurements to compare with original
datasheet.
It seems in relation to the first post than the result of a speaker with these 2" or 3" domes should be better than the FR wider cone driver I linked : seems not to be prefered to targett the goal of wider medium treble : I assume BECAUSE of off axis bad behavior of plain Full ranges !
Any who tested these both different drivers in their confort zone ?
I read also from you all than these 2" or 3" be it domes or cones are better when not XOed above 3k ! (Troels G. Zohn Krukt (aka Zaph), members here as well)....
I liked also the idea to remove the flange of the Tang Bang 3" dome 🙂 ! Any good tweeter 3/4 or 1" without flange as well to make a close ctc ?
What could be a good match tweeter with these 2" or 3" ? Vifa 19 (the version without the flange-front plate-) ?
Thanks again for all your inputs
Any who tested these both different drivers in their confort zone ?
I read also from you all than these 2" or 3" be it domes or cones are better when not XOed above 3k ! (Troels G. Zohn Krukt (aka Zaph), members here as well)....
I liked also the idea to remove the flange of the Tang Bang 3" dome 🙂 ! Any good tweeter 3/4 or 1" without flange as well to make a close ctc ?
What could be a good match tweeter with these 2" or 3" ? Vifa 19 (the version without the flange-front plate-) ?
Thanks again for all your inputs
3/4" tweeter...I like this one
https://www.parts-express.com/dayto...ount-3-4-soft-dome-neodymium-tweeter--275-035
https://www.parts-express.com/dayto...ount-3-4-soft-dome-neodymium-tweeter--275-035
This 19mm unit can be crossed low, sounds great, and is very affordable.
http://www.sbacoustics.com/index.php/products/tweeters/dome/sb19st-c000-4/
http://www.sbacoustics.com/index.php/products/tweeters/dome/sb19st-c000-4/
Dynaudio used a 19mm D21 model with D52 in a 3 way monitor i owned and was an excellent match.
I also heard these Nestorovic which are probably the speaker which most impressed me ever with a ribbon. This is what i will do some day with my D52, when have time...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I know everyone seems to love these, but my experience with them has been poor. They just sound really bad compared to the Tymphany OT19 (which costs a lot more, mind you). I would rather not even use a tweeter than use the ND20. (The treble from the Vifa/Tymphany TC fullrange speakers is superior). I would recommend the Tymphany ring radiators.
Don't know, the rest of the drivers were sourced in US, this planar if not visaton is also similar.
I plan to use my d52 with Raal 70-10, i suppose you have also heard about.
A dome + a dome should be easier to match than a dome + a planar, no ? And have less issue of sweet spot because the vertical pattern of these planars ?
I have somewhere an Audax 3/4 tweeters made for cars which sounds goods but has a Fs near 3k 😱 !
Sure this one seems nice and not so far than the Vifa's 19 ! http://www.parts-express.com/peerle...00-04-3-4-fabric-dome-tweeter-4-ohm--264-1122
I have somewhere an Audax 3/4 tweeters made for cars which sounds goods but has a Fs near 3k 😱 !
Sure this one seems nice and not so far than the Vifa's 19 ! http://www.parts-express.com/peerle...00-04-3-4-fabric-dome-tweeter-4-ohm--264-1122
Last edited:
Yes that's the one I mean! It's exceptional. I haven't tried the other XT19's but I assume they are even better.
If you insist on designing on axis, and are picky enough, ribbons might drive you nuts...But i you are ready to accept what some would call a flawed design, you should have no sweet spot issue.
Btw, imho all ribbon based designs are flawed in vertical. But ribbons are interesting for horizontal dispersion which is also the most important to imaging, while in vertical a narrow pattern will always be wide enough.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.