Wharferdale 220 - Cheap speakers CAN have good tweeters

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Just a quick one. So many $5,000 and up loudspeakers being sold today have terrible distortion and compression in the tweeters, that it's put me off the entire idea of buying fully assembled speakers ever again.

Usually I'm happy to rag on them in this forum, and anywhere else. So when a $350 pair of speakers show up with low distortion and excellent linearity I had to mention them.

Check out the linearity figures from SoundStage Network.

dev_90db.gif


Really outstanding when compared to some recently reviewed kilo-buck speakers. I wouldn't mind finding out their driver sources either, it would be great if I could use them in some upcoming surround speakers I'm making.

Best,


Erik
 
How they laughed when I said that cone tweeters work well. :D

I said that most of you using $200 scanspeak soft-dome tweeters were wasting your time. :rolleyes:

Horribly spitty things with a centre of dome resonance that was unmusical to the max with a lousy signal to noise ratio. Almost anything else was better. What about the Wharfedale 220? 5" bass is OK if you have a small room. But not strictly my favourite.

Well, time will tell who is right. My current favourite 2-way speaker to the right. Good 8" bass. And not much else wrong with it. TBH, I think a 3-way is a better approach. :)
 

Attachments

  • Wharfedale 220 Cone tweeter..JPG
    Wharfedale 220 Cone tweeter..JPG
    35 KB · Views: 119
  • Modified_MA-R300MD_HT22-8.jpg
    Modified_MA-R300MD_HT22-8.jpg
    79 KB · Views: 114
How they laughed when I said that cone tweeters work well. :D

I said that most of you using $200 scanspeak soft-dome tweeters were wasting your time. :rolleyes:

Horribly spitty things with a centre of dome resonance that was unmusical to the max with a lousy signal to noise ratio. Almost anything else was better. What about the Wharfedale 220? 5" bass is OK if you have a small room. But not strictly my favourite.

Well, time will tell who is right. My current favourite 2-way speaker to the right. Good 8" bass. And not much else wrong with it. TBH, I think a 3-way is a better approach. :)

Steve,

I think you were fooled by the wave guide. According to the specs it IS a 25mm dome tweeter. I originally thought it was co-axial and got all short of breath. :D

Well, I'm not saying these tiny speakers are THE speaker to rush out and get. I'm asking "if I can get tweeters with low distortion and high linearity in an under $400 product why can't I get it in $4,000 and up speakers from Golden Ear, Focal, etc.?"

One of the "justifications" i have for this hobby (odd I need to justify it to my cats) is that I am saving money. At this price point it's getting to the point where I won't be anymore, since I'm buying all my cabinets. Sorry, I'm not making my own cabinets. No room, no desire for more dust. Done until I'm rich enough to afford a basketball court sized woodshop with one of those $35,000 re-saw band saws Norm Abrams likes to show off in "High-End Yankee Workshop"

And are we going to get into a fight since I have a pair of Vifa dual-ring radiators coming in the mail now?

Best,


Erik
 
Last edited:
Erik, it's late at night after a hard working week to talk about all the idiocies of this seeking after perfection that is the loudspeaker business. :eek:

Trust me on this, it's all a question of trade-offs. :)

I can build LR2, BW3 and LR4 crossovers and speakers. I know what they sound like. 3 ways are easier if you understand power response as well as frequency response.

I've heard little 5" bass speakers. Reflex and closed box. I've heard all the various tweeters. TBH, if you have a big room, you won't waste time on small drivers.

The two-way is a hard speaker. So many compromises.

But underlying it all are the laws of Physics. Real-time filters and drivers are a compromise. Lenny Susskind and Dick Feynman probably knew more about this than others.

Having a mathematical and Physics background, I just instinctively realise that all is a trade-off. TBH, I think Vifa ring-radiators are quite good. Maybe SB acoustics types too.

A lot of people think high Qms (or low loss, like the Tekton M-Lore) is good too, and I do too. But I'm getting very little love from Lynn Olson and his cronies right now. But time will tell. False prophets an' all that. :D
 

Attachments

  • Waves on a sphere Prof. L Susskind.JPG
    Waves on a sphere Prof. L Susskind.JPG
    33 KB · Views: 106
  • Dick_Feynman_LOL.jpg
    Dick_Feynman_LOL.jpg
    37.9 KB · Views: 106
  • Tekton M-Lore.jpg
    Tekton M-Lore.jpg
    28 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
Erik, I'd advise you to keep an open mind. :D

When I was a young man, I kept the valve versus solid state amp question open.

I even wasted years of my life devising a transconductance amp. Which made certain Current versus Voltage assumptions. It was cool, and worked with certain impedance flattened loudspeakers. Frankly, it sucked with most stuff. Blowing fuses and sounding terrible. :eek:

These days, I just design stuff that sounds OK. Even with cheap Rotel solid-state amps. Which, IMO, do most things right.

See, mathematics and physics is always true. And most of the stuff at diyaudio is ridiculous nonsense. :D
 

Attachments

  • TheveninEquivalent2.png
    TheveninEquivalent2.png
    20.1 KB · Views: 46
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.