It seems to be that Bill Hecht invented the soft dome out of other reasons that i thought in 1967 so it is a rather new development.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_dome_tweeter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_dome_tweeter
Here it sais that he invented the soft dome in 1962 :
Loudspeaker Pioneer Bill Hecht Passes at 89 | Stereophile.com
Anyway, maybe the patent was from 1967.
Loudspeaker Pioneer Bill Hecht Passes at 89 | Stereophile.com
Anyway, maybe the patent was from 1967.
Here is another story :
hifimuseum.de - Sie sind im Bereich : Die Kalotte im Lautsprecherbau
The soft dome came from Italy in the early 60th and was adopted and improved by Braun.
So Braun was the first company in Germany that used it.
hifimuseum.de - Sie sind im Bereich : Die Kalotte im Lautsprecherbau
The soft dome came from Italy in the early 60th and was adopted and improved by Braun.
So Braun was the first company in Germany that used it.
Here are the maesurements. The cone tweeters are not very linear and the matching is poor, the second measurement shows. That may be due to age, they have 50 years on their sholders. There is a lot of energy around 10kHz so they sure will sound brilliant.
The SEAS soft dome is 6dB less sensitive on axis. That is not immediately obvious but it has 5 Ohm DC impedance and the cones have 10 Ohm.
The SEAS has of cause a wider radiation pattern and much more energy in the deeper regions. The cones drop of drastically at lower frequencies so the total radiated energy in both tweeter types is not extremely different.
The cones will sound more penetrating though.
The SEAS soft dome is 6dB less sensitive on axis. That is not immediately obvious but it has 5 Ohm DC impedance and the cones have 10 Ohm.
The SEAS has of cause a wider radiation pattern and much more energy in the deeper regions. The cones drop of drastically at lower frequencies so the total radiated energy in both tweeter types is not extremely different.
The cones will sound more penetrating though.
Attachments
You will not believe it but i am still planning to build the DUAL CL190 clone.
I bought some Peerless midranges and i will use the Audax 1 1/2 inch dome.
I have not 100 % decided on a tweeter yet.
I bought some Peerless midranges and i will use the Audax 1 1/2 inch dome.
I have not 100 % decided on a tweeter yet.
I've been using a Monacor HT22-8 cone 92mm cone tweeter in one system shown below lately, Joachim. It is incredibly smooth and mellow sounding. And the price is right! It's VERY cheap. 😀
Needs a third order crossover around 3kHz, IMO.
As an aside, the sort of woofer I have come to like lately has a cloth surround and a transparent cloth dustcap (which you can see is almost transparent to reflect the magnet). Very efficient. They don't make them like that much these days, it's rather Tannoy. I suppose a woofer with a phase plug might be almost as good.
Needs a third order crossover around 3kHz, IMO.
As an aside, the sort of woofer I have come to like lately has a cloth surround and a transparent cloth dustcap (which you can see is almost transparent to reflect the magnet). Very efficient. They don't make them like that much these days, it's rather Tannoy. I suppose a woofer with a phase plug might be almost as good.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Attachments
You could like this ones :Zwei neue Chassis - Ausgabe Juli 2013 - Lautsprecherbau-Magazin 2013 | Lautsprecherbau
They have a cloth surround and high sensitivity.
They have a dustcap though.
I know, cone tweeters can sound suprizing well.
The Monacor is good and dirst cheep.
When i want to clone the DUAL i need a softdome though.
They have a cloth surround and high sensitivity.
They have a dustcap though.
I know, cone tweeters can sound suprizing well.
The Monacor is good and dirst cheep.
When i want to clone the DUAL i need a softdome though.
To heck with authentic, Joachim. I'd go for the nicest sounding. But for all that, the Monacor HT22/8 is not very efficient. 🙂
I've had this theory for years that soft domes (and spherical dustcaps) are horrible. Robin Marshall discussed it 30 years back:
Robin Marshall: A Modicum of Genius | Stereophile.com
I found confirmation in the String Theory of all things. Lenny Susskind proved that high frequencies behave very badly on a sphere:
Lecture 9 | String Theory and M-Theory - YouTube
This is a very nice mylar tweeter in my Sony E44's:
Again, they don't make them like this anymore. A balanced drive cone tweeter. The dome weighs the same as the surround, like that old Audax cheapie. 😎
I've had this theory for years that soft domes (and spherical dustcaps) are horrible. Robin Marshall discussed it 30 years back:
Robin Marshall: A Modicum of Genius | Stereophile.com
I found confirmation in the String Theory of all things. Lenny Susskind proved that high frequencies behave very badly on a sphere:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Lecture 9 | String Theory and M-Theory - YouTube
This is a very nice mylar tweeter in my Sony E44's:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Again, they don't make them like this anymore. A balanced drive cone tweeter. The dome weighs the same as the surround, like that old Audax cheapie. 😎
Maybe i use a 19mm tweeter.
The Audax goes high so i can cross at 5kHz or even higher.
I have this ones and they are good :
H0737-08 19TFF 1
The Audax goes high so i can cross at 5kHz or even higher.
I have this ones and they are good :
H0737-08 19TFF 1
I know those SEAS 19mm units. The metal one was OK, and the 19TFF is a good celestion HF2000 replacement. These might be a bit expensive, but ring radiators avoid some of the theoretical difficulties by pinning the centre:
It's a toroidal sort of wavefront, not spherical. People seem to like them.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It's a toroidal sort of wavefront, not spherical. People seem to like them.
OK, that is that interview if hard domes are better then softdomes because soft domes break up in the audible range.
The jury is out on this. I just designed the Kalasan for SB Acoustics that uses a soft dome tweeter, although it is a ring dome.
That construction somewhat shifts the breakup to higher frequencies.
My old company Audio Physic uses cone tweeers.
We started to design those shortly before i left Audio Physic in 2004.
They sure sound different out of many reasons.
The jury is out on this. I just designed the Kalasan for SB Acoustics that uses a soft dome tweeter, although it is a ring dome.
That construction somewhat shifts the breakup to higher frequencies.
My old company Audio Physic uses cone tweeers.
We started to design those shortly before i left Audio Physic in 2004.
They sure sound different out of many reasons.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.