That's a funny claim - what's the reson for it?
I compared A and S directly and 1:1 in a proper design and A has more details/is more natural and S is more forgiving and a little more "sweet" sounding. This difference is not huge!
So I would use the S version for "hobby listening" 😉 and the hard domes when you want best resolution and natural reproduction. (which is kind of addicting, esp in a dry, controlled room).
I still didn't listen to the B version (but masured and tested it), I don't EXPECT a big difference to the A version when crossed over at 2kHz ... but I was wrong in my expectations often enough ;-) At least you have higher sensitivity and a one of a kind midrange unit for your last speaker build.
I didn't cause I chose the A version for my design! It has it's resonanve >10kHz and you can build a passive series notch filter to further dampen it.
But I cross my T25B at about 2kHz to achieve a 100% even, wide off axis response - that's different to your design.
In such a build you don't have any "metal harschness" from the midrange - don't compare that with a 6" with it's resonance at 3,5kHz!
For a build with such a high cross over frequency I would chose a smaller dome! 3" is narrowing off axis already a lot at 3,5kHz. Maybe MD60N, here FR and THD from one of my units (HiFi Compass got a very early unit I belive, I also had some tolerances with an earlier unit. They are sensitive to the backchamber damping which I plaid around a bit).
20V are about 110dBSpl here. THD is not super low with these units but it's mainly H2.
And that's the difference with the "real" domes - you can build speakers which are capable of >110dBSPL with a membrane weight of 2g. Bliesma and ATC can be used wth 2 12" underneath and for full power would need a tweeter bigger as 25mm. You have high sensitivity, no compression and the ability to reproduce crazy peak levels -> very natural sound even at higher levels. You hear details better at some higher level cause S/N is bigger.
If you can only listen at 85dBSpl in a flat ... a smaller speaker will do it ;-). But when you listen to these big ATC/PMC monitors in a big room at some level ... that's the big midrange dome "magic".
Satoris 2,5" also has this and I'm not sure if it doesn't hurt the over all design. It will bring some resistance to the system, Qm will not benefit.
The Satori is very sensitive in back chamber dampening, maybe you could come up with a better design when you don't need that metal behind the membrane.
For the cost and extra effort ... I would just buy an M74.
That's the reason I would not cross over an 3" at 3,5kHz. When useing a dome midrange without waveguide it's all about wide radiation in my designs.
When searching for more narrow radiation I would use a bigger midrange from the start cause narrow pattern >2kHz ... doesn't make to much sense for me. You have to start earlier with that.
Spending $1000 on a pair of midrange drivers just doesn’t make much sense if you consider the performance value….but hey, some folks are willing. IF I had that much coin to spend, I’d reconfigure my entire design and eliminate the mid and tweeter including the Xo components all together and just get a pair of Beyma TPL150’s. Cross those to a pair of B&C 8pe21 midwoofers. These and similar options are likely contributing to the demise of the dome midrange all together.
I have good result with Q1R paired with DMB-A in last 3way project, prety linear and nice sounding but not easy for designing crossower. Anybody experience with HiVi DMN-A ?
I agree with most of what was said comparing the Bliesma M74 domes to cheaper mid domes like th D7608. The price is the big deciding factor here and if you DO have $1000 to spend, a pair of the M74A are your best option, even over the big ATC and M74B. The performance of the M74A is pretty darn good for what it costs IF you need the best currently available 3 inch dome there is. The peak is easy to deal with, even using passive filters. The M74B isn't as good as the M74A from a practical usability standpoint. The multiple spread peaks which shift with angle are harder to address. The silk version also is more of a compromise here, but its still a very good soft dome mid. The M74A however costs the same as the Alu version, so its a moot point IMO. This is coming from someone who has had some challenges with Bliesma products (i still love my T34Bs despite the headaches), so I'm being straight forward here in saying Bliesma likely makes the best 3 inch metal dome mids currently available and probably even outdoes the ATC with it's M74S, definitely so compared to the big Volt.
The reason i adore the D7608 is because its just a good inexpensive 3 inch dome for what its capable of if you like the large dome sound on a budget. There isn't anything else on the market for the price capable of 80 - 90 percent of the performance as the Bliesma. In the right hands it sounds quite spectacular, given you don't try to cross it lower while expecting triple digit SPLs. Comparing it with the SS 10F isn't really fair. While its a good cone mid, it's not capable of the midrange performance and output with its 19mm VC. It can be crossed lower but it wont keep up above 800 hz or so. The D7608 is more agile in the mids despite the seemingly early top end rolloff. Its also capable of more dynamics overall.
The MD60-N is an odd bird. On paper it looks nice, but in real life it has audible issues around 1k. The back chamber design is a compromise and I dont like what it does with piano music. I prefer the smaller Morel domes to it.
The reason i adore the D7608 is because its just a good inexpensive 3 inch dome for what its capable of if you like the large dome sound on a budget. There isn't anything else on the market for the price capable of 80 - 90 percent of the performance as the Bliesma. In the right hands it sounds quite spectacular, given you don't try to cross it lower while expecting triple digit SPLs. Comparing it with the SS 10F isn't really fair. While its a good cone mid, it's not capable of the midrange performance and output with its 19mm VC. It can be crossed lower but it wont keep up above 800 hz or so. The D7608 is more agile in the mids despite the seemingly early top end rolloff. Its also capable of more dynamics overall.
The MD60-N is an odd bird. On paper it looks nice, but in real life it has audible issues around 1k. The back chamber design is a compromise and I dont like what it does with piano music. I prefer the smaller Morel domes to it.
Your tweeter costs €600 and goes down to 1kHz. It can produce clean loud levels with great resolution. It has very uneven off axis response! Beams the top 1,5 octave horizontal and very uneven and A LOT vertikally. I like the sound of AMTs a lot - but like to build even radiating speakers more.
2 8PE21 will give a lot of SPL and cost about €250,- But they don't do low frequencies at all, you need a BIG subwoofer or lf driver for a 3way in addition.
So let's take a 21" or good 18" or at least 2 12" - about €6-800,-
€1500,- chassis alone and you need huge crossover parts for a passive crossover or active components with plenty of power to make full use of these speakers.
M74A about €380,-, T25A/S €140,-, 2x SB34NRXL75-8 €600,-. Even with T25B you stay at about 1250,-.
You have the membrane surface of an 18" driver with more Xmax as most PA drivers and VERY low THD, also at low levels. Your midrange goes down to 550Hz with no membrane weight compared to the 2 8PE21. Off axis behaviour is WAY more even (the 2 8" will also narrow the beam at 1kHz, TLP150 has 160° at 1kHz). It lacks MAX SPL compared to your system - but is still not bad 🤓
It's always the complete system ... and 2x12"+3"+1" is a pretty good combination if you are serious about sound reproduction.
Nothing personal meant here, but I'm not in the position to compare apples with oranges. The 10F and D7608 are two completely different drivers. They sound subjectively different and have different strengths as you already know. The 10F is without question a capable driver for its design and type. Even Thiel used a version of it in their designs, which is high praise. The D7608 has that midrange clarity many cone mids can't match due to the different radiating surface types. I can't and won't talk you out of using your 10Fs if you haven't heard the difference between both types of mids.
The TPL150s are different animals all together and require a different mid driver to blend properly with, as the radiating surface area of the TPL150 approaches that of a 3 inch dome. Theres no way you'd get the lower midband efficiency compared to that of an 8 inch cone driver with just a 3 inch diaphragm. The TPL150 is a unique driver and not easy to get the best sound from despite its high end design, not to say its not possible - it is, but special considerations need to be made to do so. A good 3 inch dome can sound delicate, moreso than a direct radiating 8PE21 which really benefits from and needs a WG to shine at its best.
For most people who are in the diy speaker market, ease of use and design are very attractive which a decent cone mid accommodates hands down. Dome mids arent as easy to implement and require careful thought to get the best out of. Smaller cone mids however have higher moving mass and lower sensitivity (as trade for more xmax) than dome mids. The wider bandwidth contains some operation in cone breakup mode in the upper part of practical bandwidth. A dome mid is driven by a large VC at the dome edge which also stiffens the diaphragm where it would be prone to the majority of breakup modes.
Great insights here. Did anyone hear the M74P? HFC said he found it a nice option combining aspects of the S and B/A.
Same dome asy but slightly different motor and dampening. The DMN-A isn't worth the extra money IMO vs what you get.
They're both a decent dome mid if you get lucky and end up with a closely matching pair. That's the main issue with these, but at least with the DMB-As, the high Qts around the Fs, makes them tricky to blend cleanly with the LF. They really need a notch filter around Fs.
The Morel domes are much better and easier to use, plus they can cross lower without a notch. If the consistency was better with the Hivi domes, they would be an absolute steal. Sadly, as with any product made with cheap labor, consistency will always suffer. If you order extras and pick out a pair that are close, you can end up with a nice pair of matching mids.
I ordered 2 pairs of DMB-As and still didn't get a decent matching set, so I sent them back. These aren't light weight drivers, so shipping a pair back would cost most people 20 - 25 bucks without a business shipping account using UPS or fedex. Don't expect parts express to pay return shipping either since they don't care how close the drivers are in specs to others. They state that 20 percent deviation in TSPs is acceptable with a pair of drivers. Thats absolutely ridiculous and another reason to support places like Madisound instead. They give you much better service and the price is similar. They used to sell the Hivi domes, but dropped them due to same inconsistency issues I mentioned.
Hi Daanve, i cannot make exact comparison, but i do have right now troels discovery 861 which uses 18W/8434G00 midwoofer. I would say on my preliminary tests that comapring morel em1308 to discovery cone, both have good smooth tone, but morel dome has more details and air
(d7608 should even be a littlebit better, but i will soon see when it arrives..).
But as i said, i have not compared that exact model so take this with a bit of salt..
Yes I know, prety hard to design but when designed right very nice sounding! Another one, Hivi DM-7500 might be interestng too, even better than DMB-A, I can see many nice reviews about them, looks interesting! DMB-A have prety high fs, in my case it was not as like on paper, freq response had shape like word M with an deep hole in center freq, around 86db I was need to tune them to get flat response, indeed it was flat like a buter but crosover frequncy was around 1k anf 4 or 5k if I am not wrong, not one of the best mids, hard to get right crossover, even phase was hard to match with tweeter, for example mid was 4th order but tweeter was 3rd order to get booth in phase, in my case ended good sounding but prety hard for desing and crossower parts cost twice the domes. : ) Q1R paired with DMB-A an nice flat combination.
Attachments
Last edited:
No, not without removing glue and likely ruining the flange. I tried and stopped when I realized the dome surround is attached to the inner flange. This isn't a 30 dollar driver which wouldn't be a big loss, but $100+ is a bit too much for me.
@IamJF The MD60-N rear chamber isn't really designed with the best dampening strategy. I'm sure there is some cost cutting done here and they tried to save labor plus materials. By relying on a minimally dampened TL without absorbing media, variances in dampening are reduced if uneven amounts / densities of absorbing media are used. This was at least the case with the first run of these mids I've seen. I'm sure there are better materials and techniques to getting this driver to behave better around 1k. If someone wants to send me one of their MD60-Ns, I can come up with a better chamber dampening scheme.
I would have needed to remove the rear tube for my use case to fit it in an existing design so I messed around with it a little. Plan was to do a 3D print of a new backchamber. But then M74 appeared ... and I could build a complete new design for it, so no further development from my side.
They changed some of the dampening, the later 4 I bought where consistent and better as the old one.
They changed some of the dampening, the later 4 I bought where consistent and better as the old one.
I'm afraid not.
The speaker I built for my customer used 2 3" mids but this is a speaker for a measurement chamber, I would not do that for music listening. Next I update my main monitors with M74B but these are in wall builds - I can't do proper free air polars with these cabinets. But I hope I can do some with one M74 in a few month ... these will get the full measurement run.