Thats a slick design with a nicely done crossover. These cheap drivers are getting so good that quite alot of the coveted vintage stuff is put to shame.
I heard that about the DE120s. I have a set of DE250s and aren't blown away by their resolution, but they are the 16 ohm version which actually sound better than the 8 ohm models. Don't know why, but they just do, maybe the higher BL of 16 vs 8 ohms.
I have some 18Sound NSD1095Ns which are very nice and compact, but the price is up there for a budget application.
They are great on the faital STH100 WGs.
They are great on the faital STH100 WGs.
I don't think there's anything that can top the BMS 4526HE for what you're looking for:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/diy-compression-drivers.317125/post-5994145
I have the BMS 4552 here, the BMS 4540ND, the Eminence N151M and the DE7 here.
For what you're looking for, 4526HE is the hot ticket.
The only "real" downside to the 4526HE, versus all the others, is that you can't cross it very low. But that won't be a problem for you.
I bought mine from speakersandamps
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/diy-compression-drivers.317125/post-5994145
I have the BMS 4552 here, the BMS 4540ND, the Eminence N151M and the DE7 here.
For what you're looking for, 4526HE is the hot ticket.
The only "real" downside to the 4526HE, versus all the others, is that you can't cross it very low. But that won't be a problem for you.
I bought mine from speakersandamps
@Patrick Bateman - How low have you crossed that little BMS? I'm not looking to go under 3k 2nd or 3rd order. The WG is a bit concocted and is just designed to do 20 x 20 up top. I copied a small tractrix design that loads down to 2.5k. We'll see if the exit angle plays ball with the WG. It sounds like a nice driver. I've never really been disappointed with any of the BMS ring radiators as a whole.
@ScottG - that peerless driver has been backordered forever and if they do the same thing with it as they have done with all other Tymphany stuff, you'd have to order 500 pcs min to get them at all. Tymphany has been getting stupid with their policies. That driver is pretty good, considering the cost (was alot cheaper a few months ago). That coated TI diaphragm is a trick piece comsidering the price. I has a set of these and decided to sell them which was a mistake.
@ScottG - that peerless driver has been backordered forever and if they do the same thing with it as they have done with all other Tymphany stuff, you'd have to order 500 pcs min to get them at all. Tymphany has been getting stupid with their policies. That driver is pretty good, considering the cost (was alot cheaper a few months ago). That coated TI diaphragm is a trick piece comsidering the price. I has a set of these and decided to sell them which was a mistake.
The measurements of the BMS in the link that I posted are with a 1500Hz highpass, well below what you intend to use. It's also measured on a ridiculously tiny waveguide, so there's not much gain.
I can't imagine that you'd have any issue crossing it at 3khz. Even 2khz should be fine I think, depending on the waveguide and the slope of the xover.
I can't imagine that you'd have any issue crossing it at 3khz. Even 2khz should be fine I think, depending on the waveguide and the slope of the xover.
I haven't used it myself yet, but here in Germany the Celestion CDX1-1430 is a popular driver.
Many greetings,
Azrael
Many greetings,
Azrael
I forgot about the Celestion 1430. Thing with most Celestion drivers that use the PET diaphragm material, they tend to sound overly polite and vague up top. Same holds true for the B&C drivers with the polyimide diaphragms. PEEK sounds better and thats why I like the CDX1-1745 for a mid sized 1" driver, although they don't go low very well.
That is good low end from a small driver. I'm trying to stick with a 2nd order HP 3k xover, but I may need to go up to 3rd order based on getting phase transition right to integrate drivers smoother. I looked through the thread a bit and it seems like the driver is rather efficient compared to other small ring radiators. I ordered some of those small Lavoce drivers just to see if they're worth the money, being only 70 bucks a piece for a tiny neo driver... not bad IMO. The B&C DE7 does sound nice up top based on previous experiences with higher xover points. I generally try to focus on the imoedance curve of the driver without a WG. The less and lower the impedance peaks, the better a driver tends to sound from personal observations. Im working on a 3d model for a small tractrix horn that loads down to about 2.5k to integrate smaller mids and provide good top end extension, but also be compact enough to keep CTC spacing down. My benchmark is the Faital STH100, but its still a bit too big for my purposes, hence the smaller horn design.
I have a pair as well. Excellent driver. Construction is not quite as nice as some of the more expensive drivers but they measure well and sound good.
I would also be interested in such a small horn, not because of lack of space, but because the horn/driver combination should take place above a 5-inch midrange driver (FaitalPro M5N8-80).
Favorites at the moment are the B&C ME10v2 or the ME20. It is said that the P.Audio PH-170 is also suitable, but I would mill away some of the huge flange. The LTH-100 is also a hot candidate, but as you said: it is a bit big.
Many greetings,
Michael
Celestion 1430 is one of the rare compression drivers that's aluminum. I still like the B&C better but the Celestion is great too.
I assume it performs comparably to the 1425, which it replaced. I've posted measurements of it on various waveguides here.
I thought the cdx1-1430 celestion was a PET diaphragm driver... huh, aluminum diaphragm? interesting and worth investigating, since I like some aluminum diaphragm drivers. Thanks for that clarification.
I spent a lot of time pondering the same drivers you're looking at. Definitely one of my favorite types; I personally prefer using a small tweeter with a high-ish crossover, instead of using a large compression driver and trying to get it to do 500Hz - 20Khz.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/diy-compression-drivers.317125/
This thread has pics of some of the ones you're looking at, even disassembled, with measurements of distortion and polars. Among them are the CDX1-1425, and from what I can see, the CDX1-1430 is basically the same, but with a heat sink.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/diy-compression-drivers.317125/
This thread has pics of some of the ones you're looking at, even disassembled, with measurements of distortion and polars. Among them are the CDX1-1425, and from what I can see, the CDX1-1430 is basically the same, but with a heat sink.
I've seen that thread and read through it a bit. Completely understand your frustration with some of these drivers. There are some ways dealing with high Qts drivers, but some of that also is loading the driver with the right horn too. The reactance between the horn and rear chamber volume can be considerable, but I do understand many driver manufacturers try to aim for high ish Q to extend low end response (not in a good way).
If push came to shove, I'd probably lean towards a SB26ADC or the ceramic version on a waveguide, before I'd use a compression driver IF it's for home listening.
The BMS I recommended will absolutely melt your face off, it's ridiculously efficient. But if you don't need to hit 130dB I'd probably lean towards the SB26.
Of course, the downside to going that route is that you have to jump through some hoops to maximize the performance. If the waveguide isn't just right, you're going to see some fairly gnarly beaming above 10khz with the SB26.
But above all, the reason I keep coming back to the SB26 is that it's easily modifiable to use a metamaterial backchamber like all the new KEF speakers have, and I really think the metamaterial is worth the effort.
Having said all that, my latest project is using a ribbon tweeter. My "hunch" is that the reason the metamaterial tweeters sound so nice is because the metamaterial flattens out the impedance hump at resonance. Ribbons don't have one, so they avoid the need for a metamaterial entirely.
We'll see how the project goes.
The BMS I recommended will absolutely melt your face off, it's ridiculously efficient. But if you don't need to hit 130dB I'd probably lean towards the SB26.
Of course, the downside to going that route is that you have to jump through some hoops to maximize the performance. If the waveguide isn't just right, you're going to see some fairly gnarly beaming above 10khz with the SB26.
But above all, the reason I keep coming back to the SB26 is that it's easily modifiable to use a metamaterial backchamber like all the new KEF speakers have, and I really think the metamaterial is worth the effort.
Having said all that, my latest project is using a ribbon tweeter. My "hunch" is that the reason the metamaterial tweeters sound so nice is because the metamaterial flattens out the impedance hump at resonance. Ribbons don't have one, so they avoid the need for a metamaterial entirely.
We'll see how the project goes.
In the past I wouldn't have given a compression driver any consideration for a domestic application. Most usually have nasty resonances that make them useless for a critical listening application. I've given a smaller dome tweeter in a WG some thought, but most HF domes won't have the efficiency needed to get into the mid to high 90s dB after EQ through passive xover is applied. The mid for this build is a PRV 6MR500-NDY on a JBL PRX WG with 500 hz cutoff. Its already over 96 dB past 600 hz without the WG, useful for many purposes and sounds very accurate and open for a pro sound type driver. The WG will add a few dB down low and mate well with an eminence kappalite 3015.
I'm building this whole 3 way setup for a more hifi sounding purpose, but also double duty for parties and light PA use, also for my son's EDM production purposes. I took him to Guitar Center to look for some powered speakers and he didn't like the way any of them sounded- he's spoiled by his dad's stuff... Lol. Anyways, I thought that if I stay away from the primary resonance and cross higher on a driver that had good top end extension, it would give me lower distortion and power compression plus higher headroom - typical reasons to use a high efficiency driver. Not so easy to find a suitable driver as you already know. Most common super tweeters don't cross low under 5 or 6k without sounding nasty.
I do have some larger planars I considered, but they were too tall to fit. I was also going to try a concentric mounted super tweeter but the delay necessary to get the drivers integrated would have required dsp and I wanted the simplicity of a passive xover.
I agree that a larger driver covering the treble wouldn't be that good and even with eq it would sound weird, sort of fizzy and not much definition up top. Larger drivers just don't have the accuracy that high up. The DCX50 does check all the boxes for a super tweeter augmented large driver, but its expensive and needs a large WG to cross low enough and make it useful. I had to wait forever to get my last pair a few weeks ago from Parts Express and now they only have one left in stock, so even if I wanted to spend the money, they aren't readily available.
I figured that the most effective way to get a decent sounding compact HF driver is using a small comp driver and a custom 3d printed WG for sake of fit and performance. The design I modeled only has a 68mm mouth diameter for a practical cutoff of 2500 hz which will work well. Only issue is finding the right driver, but I will give that BMS driver a closer look based on your recommendations.
I'm building this whole 3 way setup for a more hifi sounding purpose, but also double duty for parties and light PA use, also for my son's EDM production purposes. I took him to Guitar Center to look for some powered speakers and he didn't like the way any of them sounded- he's spoiled by his dad's stuff... Lol. Anyways, I thought that if I stay away from the primary resonance and cross higher on a driver that had good top end extension, it would give me lower distortion and power compression plus higher headroom - typical reasons to use a high efficiency driver. Not so easy to find a suitable driver as you already know. Most common super tweeters don't cross low under 5 or 6k without sounding nasty.
I do have some larger planars I considered, but they were too tall to fit. I was also going to try a concentric mounted super tweeter but the delay necessary to get the drivers integrated would have required dsp and I wanted the simplicity of a passive xover.
I agree that a larger driver covering the treble wouldn't be that good and even with eq it would sound weird, sort of fizzy and not much definition up top. Larger drivers just don't have the accuracy that high up. The DCX50 does check all the boxes for a super tweeter augmented large driver, but its expensive and needs a large WG to cross low enough and make it useful. I had to wait forever to get my last pair a few weeks ago from Parts Express and now they only have one left in stock, so even if I wanted to spend the money, they aren't readily available.
I figured that the most effective way to get a decent sounding compact HF driver is using a small comp driver and a custom 3d printed WG for sake of fit and performance. The design I modeled only has a 68mm mouth diameter for a practical cutoff of 2500 hz which will work well. Only issue is finding the right driver, but I will give that BMS driver a closer look based on your recommendations.
I'll let you know if i come up with anything useful and decent sounding. The market for a higher end compact WG/CD combo that can cross lower than a typical super tweeter isnt so hot. There are a few options for drivers if a WG can be sourced.