http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/d2604-830000.pdf
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/d2604-833000.pdf
what is better for who used them ?, and the main differences ?
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/d2604-833000.pdf
what is better for who used them ?, and the main differences ?
There are a few things that let us know that the distortion is lower in the 833000. The 830000 is a very close copy of the old Vifa/Tymphany DX25, I believe that Scan-speak just changed the dome material but all other aspects are the same. This can be seen in the impedance profile of both tweeters(old DX25 vs. 830000), they are identical. They have an FS around 630 Hz and the impedance rises on the high end from 3 Ohms to about 9 Ohms. While the 833000 has much less rise in the impedance, going from about 3.3 Ohms to 5.8 Ohms. This shallow impedance rise indicates that a significant amount of copper is in the 833000 motor to lower inductance and distortion. The fruits of this labor can be seen at John's site, Zaphaudio.com. We can compare the distortion profiles of both tweeters there. The DX25 is listed in the "tweeter mishmash" and the 833000 is listed in the Blog section about 1/3 of the way down. We can see that the 833000 has significantly lower distortion and is a good value at $48 here in the US, while the DX25(830000) has merely average, if that, distortion levels.
I am skeptical whether the 830000 has FF, since its' FS peak is higher in amplitude than the 833000. While I wouldn't expect it to be flat, I think it would be lower in amplitude than the tweeter without FF.
The 833000 might need an LCR trap for the impedance peak. I have used it in a few designs, and it needed it in one but sounded fine without it in another. This will depend on how low and how steep or shallow it is crossed.
Chris
I am skeptical whether the 830000 has FF, since its' FS peak is higher in amplitude than the 833000. While I wouldn't expect it to be flat, I think it would be lower in amplitude than the tweeter without FF.
The 833000 might need an LCR trap for the impedance peak. I have used it in a few designs, and it needed it in one but sounded fine without it in another. This will depend on how low and how steep or shallow it is crossed.
Chris
Last edited:
None of them uses ferrofluid. The difference between them is, that the -3000 has got a bucking magnet mounted on it. You will see the same on other Scanspeak-tweeters with the "3000-sirname".
So are you saying that the bucking magnet lowers the impedance rise and distortion? If that is the case, why do the R2604 units have identical impedance profiles when one uses a single magnet and the other uses a bucking magnet? To me it looks as though the R2604 tweeters and the 833000 have something else going on in the motor to lower the impedance rise and distortion.
EDIT: I found a thread over at techtalk where a member dissected a DX25 and the 833000. He found that the 833000 had a significantly different motor structure. It had a copper cap as I hypothesized earlier, but it was also different in that it had a motor very similar to their excellent SD-2 motor.
Also, the XT or R2604 ring radiator tweeters have always had copper in the motor which explains the similar impedance profiles and lower distortion.
Hope this helps.
Chris
The R2604 units have not got similar impedance profiles! They just haven't got the upper peaking, because of the different type of diaphragm. Still a stronger magnet lowers the peak resistance. And yes, I would say that a stronger magnet lowers the distortion too. At least that's what I've been told by the engineers from Scanspeak/Tymphany/SB acoustics. By the way, Tymphany has also got equivalents of the two units. They both contain ferrofluid though. Their names are dx25tg09-04 and dx25bg60-04. I don't know whether the "b" is for "bucking", but I would be very surprised if both Tymphany and Scanspeak sold two tweeters, that looked very much alike on the outside, but contained significantly different motorsystems on the inside, without telling about it, since that is what they do for a living...
Well the guy at techtalk didn't just talk to someone, he actually opened up the units and saw the difference. I doubt he is lying about a copper cap, that would be fairly easy to spot. That was my point, that the 833000 has a better motor which gives it better performance. There is no proof otherwise. And furthermore adding a bucking magnet would have the effects you described on the r series also, why doesn't it? Tymphany may well produce pretty much the same tweeter for both of them, I never said otherwise so I don't see the point there.
Last edited:
Tymphany and Scan-speak have different owners and compete against each other and they have differentiated their products very clearly if you just look at the spec sheets. They also do not use the same dome material. Looking at them it is clear the only thing they may share is dome shape and attachment points and a bucking magnet. Their frequency response, fs, gap height, excursion, le, and other specs are completely different from each other. The Scan-speak tweeters are definitely based on the older Vifa/Tymphany units(although I believe Scan- and Vifa were owned by the same company then), but it appears Scan-speak has chosen to improve/change the designs. Tymphany does however offer very good products at great price points, but is is so hard to believe that scan would want to separate their models and make improvements since they now are separate from and complete with tymphany? All the data points to this, but for some reason a lot people want/need to believe they are the same products.
As for the R2604 units not having the same impedance profile, please explain. The FS for both units is only 60 hz apart with an identical amplitude and from 900Hz on up they are within about .2 Ohms of each other. This is within unit to unit variances of the same product for most manufacturers including some Scan-speak models I have tested. That is identical to me. Also, please explain why the ring radiator series do not exhibit the same effect that you claim the bucking magnet has on the D series.
You are making claims with no data to back it up, this muddies the waters and does not give an accurate answer to the OP's question. Please provide data to prove your claims. I will gladly admit I'm in error if it is proven, but all the data I have seen points away from your claims.
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.