Tweeters for BMR TEBM46

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
the 1.3 sounds better than those reinforced ribbons (Fountek design).

the 1.3’s dispersion is also quite a bit wider (note that the rt1 plot goes to 45 degrees off-axis whereas the 1.3 plot above is out to 60 degrees).

-to get better apparent detail & “air” you will need to spend more on a traditional folded ribbon like the AC G2Si, and you will also need to revise the high-pass a bit higher in freq. like 6 kHz or higher.
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Since when is Meniscus gone?

Regarding the common smaller planar tweeters, these tend to have more HD in the lower mids than most domes. I like isodynamic planars, but not crossed over as low as domes can be, which have more dynamic capability in that regard. I would only use isodynamic planars in a 3 way crossed higher up.
-depends on how you use them. I doubt he’s listened to many designs with a midrange that can legitimately extend high enough in freq. to manage the low-pass substantively above 4 kHz - that’s a rare thing.

Note: ”Wolf”teeth has done at least one design with the 1.3’s (and he’s done a lot of designs over the years) - might ask him what he thinks of the driver when compared to others and what he thinks of its use per your requests.

Also, to give some idea of dispersion sound of the 1.3’s and a high-pass that’s lower than ideal that will have higher non-linear distortion:

(it’s YouTube and a design mounted on a wall, and who knows what other problems - likely also being a bit “hot” relative to wall reflections, so don’t “read into it” to much.)

Here is something far more similar design-wise as far as mid. and 1.3 integration as I've suggested, but no real ability to listen for differences with dispersion:

Last edited: