I like that HF1440 more than TD-4001. TAD looks easier to cross passively.
Wonder when HF1440 projects start to flow in to diyaudio
The alignment and different balance contributes to it, sure. Tad gave more hf in the usher horn. I also tried the Yuichies pulled 8cm out, which gave +/- the same time alignment to previous setup. But the biggest contributor is the more non-resonant behaviour of the faital. Tad has a hf peak in the response and impedance and has Be suspension also which translates to slightly resonant behaviour. Pros and cons in everything.
Faital is more unforgiving also to electronics, smooth as butter also with the cheap class-b pro-amp. Which does not mean it won't differentiate better amps as well, it just doesn't get offended easily.
The membrane is much softer in Faital than in BMS ring radiators. Faital has very "dead" sound when knoched (gently the edge of the VC) due to it's soft membrane. You can even push the membrane gently from the VC and it moves in quite easily. In this regard it's more like a silk dome tweeter among the comp drivers. I think it contributes greatly to it's non-resonant sound signature.
Last edited:
Good description of the differences between the TAD and the Faital 
. Just what I expected.
It is not without reason that TAD drivers have been the benchmark in large format studio monitors for decades.
Personally, I would prefer the Faital, because of its forgiveness with bad (compressed) recordings. Because of this, the Faital should cause less listening fatigue.
Regarding diaphragm materials: polyester is indeed stiff/hard compared to polymer(s).
Elastomer, a subset of polymer, was popularized by Jonas Renkus as material for the surrounds of Aluminium diaphragms.
Both Faital and Beyma use special polymers for diaphragms.
. Just what I expected.It is not without reason that TAD drivers have been the benchmark in large format studio monitors for decades.
Personally, I would prefer the Faital, because of its forgiveness with bad (compressed) recordings. Because of this, the Faital should cause less listening fatigue.
Regarding diaphragm materials: polyester is indeed stiff/hard compared to polymer(s).
Elastomer, a subset of polymer, was popularized by Jonas Renkus as material for the surrounds of Aluminium diaphragms.
Both Faital and Beyma use special polymers for diaphragms.
Last edited:
^Yep, brain was confused
I will drop some measurements. I will measure the Faital also with higher level so the H3 can be seen more clearly.
The td-4001 diaphragms are god knows how old, not in their prime anymore perhaps (H3): td-4001 distortion - Google Search
Measuring distance 50cm, 0deg. No xo, no eq.
Distortion plots were measured from the mouth (same drive voltage as in 50cm measurement):
I will drop some measurements. I will measure the Faital also with higher level so the H3 can be seen more clearly.
The td-4001 diaphragms are god knows how old, not in their prime anymore perhaps (H3): td-4001 distortion - Google Search
Measuring distance 50cm, 0deg. No xo, no eq.
Distortion plots were measured from the mouth (same drive voltage as in 50cm measurement):
Last edited:
Thanks for the measurements!
The HF1440 is better than I expected. Many (most?) Faital drivers show more ragged responses in real life, compared to the smoothed factory plots.
This even applies to the excellent HF108(R) to some extent.
The HF1440 appears to be devoid of any breakup, instead there's a gradual roll-off.
The HF1440 is better than I expected. Many (most?) Faital drivers show more ragged responses in real life, compared to the smoothed factory plots.
This even applies to the excellent HF108(R) to some extent.
The HF1440 appears to be devoid of any breakup, instead there's a gradual roll-off.
cool project, glad i saw this thread!
i too have been conducting some testing on my TAD drivers as well over the last few months, so i am happy to find some reference points against which i can compare what i am seeing. in my case, on the 4001s i am seeing much lower distortion than that. this was measured in the mouth of the horn as well (REW). these were used drivers, i couldn't break the seal to get the back off to inspect the diaphragms but i suspect they have never been opened.
i too have been conducting some testing on my TAD drivers as well over the last few months, so i am happy to find some reference points against which i can compare what i am seeing. in my case, on the 4001s i am seeing much lower distortion than that. this was measured in the mouth of the horn as well (REW). these were used drivers, i couldn't break the seal to get the back off to inspect the diaphragms but i suspect they have never been opened.
Attachments
Last edited:
Does this mean that the adapter for HF1440 is in total 8cm long? Why did you choose such a long adapter? What about the inner profile of the adapter, linear, exponential, whatever?
Thanks for the plots! What wonders me first is the strong peak for the Be driver below 20kHz. This should not occur as Be has it's first mode around 26kHz. What equipment and especially what microphone did you use for the measurements?
Anyway, I would say the clear winner is the TD-4001. More linear, especially not this strange region starting from 1k5. Much more HF output. Less and more evenly distributed distortions.
It is simply unbelievable how much HF energy the TD-4001 can reproduce with such a large diaphragm. I have never seen a comparable driver.
The previous setup which I referred to regarding the 8cm was not with Yuichi but with Usher horn with is less deep. With Yuichi the distance stays about the same with both faital or tad (0,5-1cm difference to the dome/radiator, faital+adapter is little longer).
The Faitals 1,4"->2" throat adapter is 77mm long and conical/straight flare. Td-4001 has built-in throat adapter which is 75mm deep (to the fly net, cannot see deeper) and is also 1,4"->2" conical flare. The reason for 77mm long adapter is that I wanted to emulate the tad, for which the yuichi horn is specifically designer for.
I had actually read that td-4001 built-in adapter is 64mm (or 65mm) long and the expansion 1,5"->2", but this is not the case (I measured 75mm/1,4"->2" this morning). The expasion rate is the same however (~13deg iirc) and I got the throat adapter for faitals "close enough" also by using the wrong information regarding the tad's built-in throat adapter. I would have made the adapter 75mm long if I had known (should have measured myself but would have required detaching them
).
Last edited:
To be precise, the internal throat section of the TAD TD-4001 driver is actually conical, 74mm deep, and goes from 36.7mm dia (1.445") to 49.2mm dia (1.937"). The included angle is thus 9.7degrees and the equivalent exponential flare rate is 217Hz.
These are old Japanese measurements straight from an MJ magazine article.
Marco.
These are old Japanese measurements straight from an MJ magazine article.
Marco.
Hi Marco,
would you please explain how this exponential flare rate is calculated. I am not familiar withis and I only see aconical section that does not have constant flare rate or is only begin and end surface and the total length used?
I assume that it should be below the usable range of the driver?
The selling price of the TAD TD-4001 is 3.221,50 Euro, whereas the FaitalPro HF1440 costs 250 Euro.
Taking some of the response irregularities into consideration, caused by the adapter, the vanes etc., the HF1440's performance is excellent.
The output drops, true, but that doesn't make it unusable. Quite the contrary I'd say, Legis has posted the extremely clean response up to 23kHz.
Taking some of the response irregularities into consideration, caused by the adapter, the vanes etc., the HF1440's performance is excellent.
The output drops, true, but that doesn't make it unusable. Quite the contrary I'd say, Legis has posted the extremely clean response up to 23kHz.