I just received my SEOS10 wave guides that I got really cheap by going in on the group buy. The quality is just awesome.
I need to buy compression drivers and want either the BMS 4550 or B&C DE250. The cost is irrelevant to me and I want the one that has better sound quality in a loud music system that is also used for home theater. They cant be wide so I went with the 10" WG to couple to two FaitalPRO 8PR200 8" drivers in a TMM at around 1400hz. The system has a ton of EQ so I dont care which is flatter. Its also an active system so experimenting with crossover is easy.
FaitalPRO 8PR200 8" Neodymium Professional Woofer 16 Ohm | 294-1176
I know the BMS is a tank and handles power, play efficiently, and crosses lower than I need. I prefer this driver but I have read that it has a big peak high in freq that annoys some. Is this an issue? While I can flatten the response, a big peak up there may be the result of something that EQ alone doesn't fix.
I know Geddes prefers and uses the DE250. His vote carries weight with me. I am not however running a speaker company needing to constantly buy drivers so cost and availability arent a concern. If all else is similar, I'm leaning toward the BMS.
Thank in advance for your input.
I need to buy compression drivers and want either the BMS 4550 or B&C DE250. The cost is irrelevant to me and I want the one that has better sound quality in a loud music system that is also used for home theater. They cant be wide so I went with the 10" WG to couple to two FaitalPRO 8PR200 8" drivers in a TMM at around 1400hz. The system has a ton of EQ so I dont care which is flatter. Its also an active system so experimenting with crossover is easy.
FaitalPRO 8PR200 8" Neodymium Professional Woofer 16 Ohm | 294-1176
I know the BMS is a tank and handles power, play efficiently, and crosses lower than I need. I prefer this driver but I have read that it has a big peak high in freq that annoys some. Is this an issue? While I can flatten the response, a big peak up there may be the result of something that EQ alone doesn't fix.
I know Geddes prefers and uses the DE250. His vote carries weight with me. I am not however running a speaker company needing to constantly buy drivers so cost and availability arent a concern. If all else is similar, I'm leaning toward the BMS.
Thank in advance for your input.
Last edited:
Hi Spinmonster, the BC DE250 has a very flat frequency response, which is irrelevant for you. There is a slightly modified DE250TN, I haven't seen what the difference is, apart from higher SPL. They have several powerful 1.4" CD but will they fit ? BC seems to be better built than BMS, from what I see.
Hi tinitus
Please ask someone who uses BMS. I can only confirm that the drivers from BC that I am using are very well manufactured. I am not an engineer. You can disassemble the mentioned drivers and examine them at leisure. I also consider the weight and the price, but the only way to know for sure is to mount both and to measure their acoustic response. Looking forward, if you like to do it.
Please ask someone who uses BMS. I can only confirm that the drivers from BC that I am using are very well manufactured. I am not an engineer. You can disassemble the mentioned drivers and examine them at leisure. I also consider the weight and the price, but the only way to know for sure is to mount both and to measure their acoustic response. Looking forward, if you like to do it.
In a blind listening test (16 audiophiles in the local club) between a B&C DE250 and a TAD meg-bucks 1" Alnico driver in identical system designs, the differences were not statistically significant, but the B&C edged out the TAD slightly. Now if there is little difference between one driver and another that is ten times more expensive can anyone argue that there is really any differences in compression drivers. I don't believe that there are (for home use, pro is different). All of the tests that I have done or even seen on compression drivers as used in a home environment say that the differences are very small. The system design, waveguide and crossover will dominate the sound quality making the compression driver itself a very small aspect of the end result.
And please don't quote me non-blind or circumstantial results. They don't count.
I recently switched to the DE500 in my high end system, which is a little smoother than the DE250. A lot more expensive however. It works quite well.
And please don't quote me non-blind or circumstantial results. They don't count.
I recently switched to the DE500 in my high end system, which is a little smoother than the DE250. A lot more expensive however. It works quite well.
I've had the exact opposite experience. I've sent back DE250 and DE120 compression drivers due to quality issues (extra flashing not removed from phase plug, and open voice coil upon delivery). I've owned BMS 4550, 4552ND, and 4540ND. All of the BMS drivers exhibited excellent workmanship and attention to detail - flawless in their construction.
And I have had the opposite experience to yours. I have never had a DE250 failure in hundreds, maybe even a thousand installations. They have changed slightly over time, but they are always in spec and always work just fine. I have never used BMS in volume so I can't comment, but there is nothing wrong with B&C's quality either.
Is it safe to say that with the same slope and freq cross over, the BMS plays substantially louder (higher SPL)?
I have 11,000 watts powering 4-15's and 4-8" pro drivers, and I'm tired of replacing tweeters/voice coils hence my move to a compression driver. It appears that the BMS 4550 handles more power and is more sensitive. The rest of the system easily hits 125db peaks. If the DE250 hits 125db peaks @1400 LR4, then its likely a moot point.
I have 11,000 watts powering 4-15's and 4-8" pro drivers, and I'm tired of replacing tweeters/voice coils hence my move to a compression driver. It appears that the BMS 4550 handles more power and is more sensitive. The rest of the system easily hits 125db peaks. If the DE250 hits 125db peaks @1400 LR4, then its likely a moot point.
I agree, but if someone used both and reports that one sounds tizzy up top while the other is not, on the same wave guide, then its of interest to me. I think most of the complaints driver to driver are that some refuse to use EQ which is not my situation.
In pro work we had some failures of the DE250. It is not B&C's highest output driver. You might want something with a larger voice coil. I will say that all our DE250 failures in clubs went away when we rolled off the high end a bit. The amps clipping (most of the time at these clubs) moved the spectrum way up and there was no attenuation at these higher frequencies (> 15 kHz) so the voice coil would get hot from all the added energy. With a little series inductance this problem went away.
Not substantially louder, but AFIK the annular 44.5mm diaphragm BMS has slightly more Sd than the dome B&C 44mm diaphragm.
I'd guestimate the 4550 could do 2 dB louder than the DE250 at 1400 Hz and up (at a similar distortion level).
Either driver should be able to keep up with a 2 x 8" (if they are front loaded).
Neither sound "tizzy" :^).
Art
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.