I think the main thing you get is motor strength and an extra ~3-4dB sensitivity.
Now - of course the above may not seem important, but it could help with a lower crossover point, as in less excursion for the neodymium version to reach the same SPL as the conventional ferrite magnet version.
Both are likely to have very similar sonics as they use the same dome and surround and will have similar off-axis and on-axis response profiles.
If it was my money... I would probably stick with the plain R version unless I needed that sensitivity in the design.
PS: I have not heard either.
Now - of course the above may not seem important, but it could help with a lower crossover point, as in less excursion for the neodymium version to reach the same SPL as the conventional ferrite magnet version.
Both are likely to have very similar sonics as they use the same dome and surround and will have similar off-axis and on-axis response profiles.
If it was my money... I would probably stick with the plain R version unless I needed that sensitivity in the design.
PS: I have not heard either.
as in less excursion for the neodymium version to reach the same SPL as the conventional ferrite magnet version.
I could be wrong Dave, but I think that for a 29 mm diaphragm to produce a certain SPL, there has to be some given amount of excursion... no matter if the magnet is weak or strong. So according to my thinking, both versions would have the same excursion at the same SPL / frequency... but the ND version gets there with less voltage and current. Does this make sense?
I could be wrong Dave, but I think that for a 29 mm diaphragm to produce a certain SPL, there has to be some given amount of excursion... no matter if the magnet is weak or strong. So according to my thinking, both versions would have the same excursion at the same SPL / frequency... but the ND version gets there with less voltage and current. Does this make sense?
Jim, you're right, I often see this kind of missunderstanding when it comes to dipole woofers also, high sensitivity is supposed to be good because it use less excursion for a certain spl. It's xmax that decides how low/loud you can go, not sensitivity.
Just to follow up on this, would the TW29R and TW29RN be interchangeable if taking care of the difference in sensitivity through the padding resistors?
Here you go.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/SBA-tweeters.htm
There's also this.
http://www.audioexcite.com/?p=6046
That should answer all of your questions. That is if you still have any considering this post is from 2020.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/SBA-tweeters.htm
There's also this.
http://www.audioexcite.com/?p=6046
That should answer all of your questions. That is if you still have any considering this post is from 2020.
Yes, they are interchangeable. the Neo versions will have marginally lower distortion on paper, but cannot be usually detected. The Neo versions require a slightly higher crossover point because of the smaller gap, which is a potential gotcha. I have the N version crossed over at 2.3kHz/2nd order, and it sounds great. Also the 29BN (dome version) in an upcoming design crossed at 1.6k/6th order, and I expect it to perform almost as well.
I'm currently building a set of speakers using the TW29TXN-B. I like the driver.Yes, they are interchangeable. the Neo versions will have marginally lower distortion on paper, but cannot be usually detected. The Neo versions require a slightly higher crossover point because of the smaller gap, which is a potential gotcha. I have the N version crossed over at 2.3kHz/2nd order, and it sounds great. Also the 29BN (dome version) in an upcoming design crossed at 1.6k/6th order, and I expect it to perform almost as well.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- Satori tw29r vs tw29rn