...Besides it's cooler to say Titanium than Aluminum. Titan vs. Alum, no brainer
Uh, well, yes, and Beryllium sounds even cooler. But my understanding is Be is stiffer than Ti which in turn is stiffer than Al.
So with good engineering, you can push the breakup modes and the mass-controlled high frequency rolloff to higher frequencies.
heard anyone faital drivers with "ketone polimer" diaphragm?
FaitalPRO - Professional Loudspeakers Made in Italy
FaitalPRO - Professional Loudspeakers Made in Italy
what model(s) 18Sound drivers do you have ?
Last edited:
and the manufacturers are more concerned with reliability in the field than in sonic quality for these pro drivers.
There have been some plots and charts floating around that show the nasty breakup modes of Ti vs Al. So it's not all subjective.
Of course I can not find those charts and graphs now, so I'm no help at all.
Aluminum cone drivers usually have really nasty breakups... I assume the compression drivers are the same way.
Aside from obvious resonance at about 13khz the titanium cd are more accurate than soft mylars. I've done burst testing of d220ti and de250. I've lived with both and clearly the metal driver produce more transparent sound e.g. Cymbals. The soft driver may sound smoother due to damped resonances, but they also sound mellow.
I have compared phenolic (stock) Klipsch k79k tweeters with tiatanium diaprhragms and the ti`s are smoother more extended sounding and seem to have more headroom. They are mor relaxed and easier to listen to. Same goes for the mids. I have compared phenoluc mids in the K700 the K701 and the min in the Forte ll and the KLF 20. In all cases I heard essentially the same differences as with the tweeters except I thought the difference was more pronounced in the mids. In a word they are smooth in two words smooth and detailed. I would not consider switching back but I am open to listening to other materials. Just my experience. Best regards Moray James.
Simple question:
Why do Klipsch and JBL choose to use titanium diaphragms in their compression drivers, when mylar, polymide etc. sounds much more pleasant?
Well, for some models JBL chooses to use BMS drivers.
Let's not overlook the fact that in certain usage requirements, harsh can potentially be good. I never use my Klipsches to play music for the reasons mentioned in this thread, but when it comes to watching a violent movie, I'll take the harsh punchiness of the Klipsch towers over the smoother notes of my music setup without a second thought.
Something about that bite really draws me into movies.. Maybe that's at least one reason we see these harsher-sounding drivers used so often in IMAX and other theaters? Just my humble .02
Something about that bite really draws me into movies.. Maybe that's at least one reason we see these harsher-sounding drivers used so often in IMAX and other theaters? Just my humble .02
Nope, that's just making excuses for some performance defect. I don't have a problem being drawn into movies with HF drivers I can happily use for music, at low levels or reference.
I own enough better speakers than my Klipsches to definitively say otherwise. To each his own
I'm thinking of the 80s era pro compression drivers. My recollection was that they were heavily into pure titanium diaphragms. (Or at least advertized as such.) No?
David
I was there when JBL changed from aluminum to titanium diaphragms in the 2421 to 2425 drivers: the two materials did NOT look the same. The performance was different as well, in both sound and durability. Where did this notion of faux titanium come from?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.