Shall I do this pro What hifi?
First of all the system its all used in. The 97 is partnered with a W15cy001 driver used as a mid, and a peerless 850146 bass driver. The DAC used is a TEAC D-T1 fed via a computer playing uncompressed wave files. The speakers are fully active, the bass gets 200 watts from a Slone amp the mid and tweets get 80 watts via another slone amp. Crossover frequencies and slopes are 24db linkwitz riley at 150hz and 2000hz. Cables used are QED silver anniversary on the mids and tweets and a thicker copper cable on the bass. The interconnects are ones I made myself. All the drivers are directly coupled to the amplifiers except the tweeter which has a large 70uf cap to protect it from turn on thumps.
SS95 £160 pr inc VAT
Pros - Very detailed and smooth sounding tweeter without a hint of harshness with zero listening fatigue.
Cons - The 97 exists.
SS97 £190 pr inc VAT
Pros - Extreamly detailed and smooth sounding tweeter, superb dynamics and mico detailing with zero harshness and listening fatigue.
Cons - Nothing except requires very good partnering EQ to hear it at its best.
OK so thats a lil bit of fun, but heres the proper stuff.
I had used the 95 for about 1.5 years so knew its sound very well, and any changes that were brought about via a different tweeter would be easily apparent. This tweeter had served me well and done nothing wrong and if I didnt have the DIY hifi bug wanting me to get more I probably would have stuck with it, would that have been a wise choice? In short NO, because the 97 is easily a superior product and that was apparent within the first few bars of the first song I played Sarah Mclachlans Angel. As soon as she started to sing I knew my money had not been wasted.
The 97 sounds pretty much the same as the 95 but with added extras. To say the 95 sounds restrained seems a little harsh because it is still a very good tweeter, but compared with the 97, thats what it sounds like. With the 97 in tow everything seems to be more lively and dynamic, trainsients have more attack and im not just talking about the climax of an orchestral piece, everything from a singer starting to a guitar being plucked just seem more alive.
The 97 also is brilliant at mirco details, the back drop to which music is set is more apparent, echos in the acoustic which were there before are now sort of polished, which makes them sound clearer bringing more presence to the music. All the little small things that jump about in the musical frey are reveiled more then the 95. Ella Fitzgerald singing Angel Eyes from the Intimate set illustated this well, this whole CD is just her and a piano. At a point in the song the piano stops playing and she sings solo, when she energises the room she is in, the resulting reverb is clearer and more enjoyable to listen to. Whereas Liberty X Jumpin' is good at showing off the small lil things that jump around, although this song isnt really what we would call audiophile material its a very complex busy bit of music, which the 97 pulls to bits better then the 95.
The "air" around individual intruments and voices is better making them more singled out and clearer. This was clear on The River sung by Cookie Rankin of the Rankin Family, her voice with the 95 before sounded good as did the whole piece but with the 97 sound separation was improved isolating her from the rest of the instruments bringing more deatail to her performance and making intruments easier to follow.
Moving on to Nora Jones Come Away With Me playing Seven Years again her voice is fantastically real with real presence, when the middle 8 ends and she come in again this time with herself backing several times, each indivual voice is givin more space to perform within. Its almost like sometimes the spotlight is on her center stage and then other times the light turns to emphasise the backing singers, this time more lights have been turned on making them all take the lead.
Anastacia now with Not That Kind singing the title track of the album by the same name thunders from the speakers. Her voice gains more "power" sounding crisper then usual, the drum kits hihats are more clearly revealed too as if everything else.
Jessye Norman singing Strauss' Four last songs has always been one of my favourite classical pieces and this time was no exception. I only listened to the 2nd movement but from that she had added to her much of what Anastacia gained, sounding more powerful, this is not to say forceful in the least she just had more oomph. The best bit though was the orchestra, everything sounded magnificent, the strings particularly became more serparated from each other, this had the knock on effect of enlarging the soundstage.
From Strauss to Holst with the planets set playing mercury the winged messenger, this has all the same bonuses as the Strauss piece although this time even more so as the focus isnt on the singer this time but on the ochestra as a whole. Every intrument was a delight to listen to each one playing from its own space in the soundstage. The soundstage width here was also wider then I has previously experienced with this piece. The one major quality which shines through with this tweeter is how quickly it stops and starts, most noticeable is now quickly is stops, there is no overhang what so ever, I dont have a ribbon to compare this to but its the fastest tweeter I have ever heard.
So in conclusion is this tweeter worth going for over the 95?? The short answer is Yes, the long answer is Most deffinately yes!
But however I do feel that its not entirely justified to spend the extra money if you dont have partnering equipment up to the job. My quad 77 integrated would just not have been good enough to reveal all what the 97 can do. The tweeter is very transparent and highly revealing, replacing the Quad with a Slone low distortion amp, removed a smog like veil from the sound, which tended to smother what the 97 does well. The Quad was a highly regarded good sounding £700 amp. So unless you have better then this think twice about the 97. But if you have a really good set up and live in the UK then get it no question its only £15 more each. In the states the difference is a little more, but if you have the equipment save those pennies and plumb for the 97. You wont be dissapointed.
I hope that wasnt too much to read but I hope you find it helpful.
First of all the system its all used in. The 97 is partnered with a W15cy001 driver used as a mid, and a peerless 850146 bass driver. The DAC used is a TEAC D-T1 fed via a computer playing uncompressed wave files. The speakers are fully active, the bass gets 200 watts from a Slone amp the mid and tweets get 80 watts via another slone amp. Crossover frequencies and slopes are 24db linkwitz riley at 150hz and 2000hz. Cables used are QED silver anniversary on the mids and tweets and a thicker copper cable on the bass. The interconnects are ones I made myself. All the drivers are directly coupled to the amplifiers except the tweeter which has a large 70uf cap to protect it from turn on thumps.
SS95 £160 pr inc VAT
Pros - Very detailed and smooth sounding tweeter without a hint of harshness with zero listening fatigue.
Cons - The 97 exists.
SS97 £190 pr inc VAT
Pros - Extreamly detailed and smooth sounding tweeter, superb dynamics and mico detailing with zero harshness and listening fatigue.
Cons - Nothing except requires very good partnering EQ to hear it at its best.
OK so thats a lil bit of fun, but heres the proper stuff.
I had used the 95 for about 1.5 years so knew its sound very well, and any changes that were brought about via a different tweeter would be easily apparent. This tweeter had served me well and done nothing wrong and if I didnt have the DIY hifi bug wanting me to get more I probably would have stuck with it, would that have been a wise choice? In short NO, because the 97 is easily a superior product and that was apparent within the first few bars of the first song I played Sarah Mclachlans Angel. As soon as she started to sing I knew my money had not been wasted.
The 97 sounds pretty much the same as the 95 but with added extras. To say the 95 sounds restrained seems a little harsh because it is still a very good tweeter, but compared with the 97, thats what it sounds like. With the 97 in tow everything seems to be more lively and dynamic, trainsients have more attack and im not just talking about the climax of an orchestral piece, everything from a singer starting to a guitar being plucked just seem more alive.
The 97 also is brilliant at mirco details, the back drop to which music is set is more apparent, echos in the acoustic which were there before are now sort of polished, which makes them sound clearer bringing more presence to the music. All the little small things that jump about in the musical frey are reveiled more then the 95. Ella Fitzgerald singing Angel Eyes from the Intimate set illustated this well, this whole CD is just her and a piano. At a point in the song the piano stops playing and she sings solo, when she energises the room she is in, the resulting reverb is clearer and more enjoyable to listen to. Whereas Liberty X Jumpin' is good at showing off the small lil things that jump around, although this song isnt really what we would call audiophile material its a very complex busy bit of music, which the 97 pulls to bits better then the 95.
The "air" around individual intruments and voices is better making them more singled out and clearer. This was clear on The River sung by Cookie Rankin of the Rankin Family, her voice with the 95 before sounded good as did the whole piece but with the 97 sound separation was improved isolating her from the rest of the instruments bringing more deatail to her performance and making intruments easier to follow.
Moving on to Nora Jones Come Away With Me playing Seven Years again her voice is fantastically real with real presence, when the middle 8 ends and she come in again this time with herself backing several times, each indivual voice is givin more space to perform within. Its almost like sometimes the spotlight is on her center stage and then other times the light turns to emphasise the backing singers, this time more lights have been turned on making them all take the lead.
Anastacia now with Not That Kind singing the title track of the album by the same name thunders from the speakers. Her voice gains more "power" sounding crisper then usual, the drum kits hihats are more clearly revealed too as if everything else.
Jessye Norman singing Strauss' Four last songs has always been one of my favourite classical pieces and this time was no exception. I only listened to the 2nd movement but from that she had added to her much of what Anastacia gained, sounding more powerful, this is not to say forceful in the least she just had more oomph. The best bit though was the orchestra, everything sounded magnificent, the strings particularly became more serparated from each other, this had the knock on effect of enlarging the soundstage.
From Strauss to Holst with the planets set playing mercury the winged messenger, this has all the same bonuses as the Strauss piece although this time even more so as the focus isnt on the singer this time but on the ochestra as a whole. Every intrument was a delight to listen to each one playing from its own space in the soundstage. The soundstage width here was also wider then I has previously experienced with this piece. The one major quality which shines through with this tweeter is how quickly it stops and starts, most noticeable is now quickly is stops, there is no overhang what so ever, I dont have a ribbon to compare this to but its the fastest tweeter I have ever heard.
So in conclusion is this tweeter worth going for over the 95?? The short answer is Yes, the long answer is Most deffinately yes!
But however I do feel that its not entirely justified to spend the extra money if you dont have partnering equipment up to the job. My quad 77 integrated would just not have been good enough to reveal all what the 97 can do. The tweeter is very transparent and highly revealing, replacing the Quad with a Slone low distortion amp, removed a smog like veil from the sound, which tended to smother what the 97 does well. The Quad was a highly regarded good sounding £700 amp. So unless you have better then this think twice about the 97. But if you have a really good set up and live in the UK then get it no question its only £15 more each. In the states the difference is a little more, but if you have the equipment save those pennies and plumb for the 97. You wont be dissapointed.
I hope that wasnt too much to read but I hope you find it helpful.
I have the 9800 and the Excel Millennium in two pairs of my speakers right now. Both are bar none, the best tweeters I have ever heard, though I want some more time with some ribbons to finally decide. The 9800 has incredible transient abilities, it is very alive, and very accurate. The Seas has more detail though, but overall a much warmer presentation. While in comparison the 9800 would be considered a little hollow sounding, not to say that it isn’t an amazing tweeter, it truly is. The Usher 9950 which I have also listened to extensively and is supposed to be very similar to the 9500 is good, but at least one, maybe two big notches down from the 9800 and Millennium.
-Paul Hilgeman
-Paul Hilgeman
Right now I have had time to listen to lots more and got other peoples opinions. The first person dragged to my room was me mother. I sat her down and played her favourite songs she was familiar with on the system. She thought it sounded better, which is a small miracle to say the least, shes NOT golden eared but could clearly say that they were deffinatly better, had more clarity was something she said. The my dad, he again said it was better saying that voices were separated better not as much as a jumble as they were before, not that they were very much jumbled but this is just better. He said if there were a perfect sound source these were quite a bit closer to it then with the 95's. I agree with this everything I have listened to is better from christina aguilera to strauss, from Holst to the darkness, nothing sounds worse.
Now im wating on the 10"XLS to arrive I wonder if the story will be the same there. Hmmm ill keep you posted!
Now im wating on the 10"XLS to arrive I wonder if the story will be the same there. Hmmm ill keep you posted!
Heh I have heard that they produce really musical subs too, and can be used fairly high up, not that Im gonna use em past 150 anyway. Plus Besl? uses them as bass drivers in their speakers, as do mission in their palistro? I think. The designer of the ugly duckling used XLS for the bass application too. Anyway all the data points towards them being fine, albeit with the need for EQ to get good bass response, but Ive done sims with available data and they will fit in just fine.
well they dont call me barbie for nothing you know 
, its not fair I tell you, just not fair!Sorry to assist resurrecting a dead thread.
5th Element, thank you for your review, it is hard to find reviews on expensive drivers.
I do have some questions however.
In your setup, what is your toe in, and listening distance? Do you do a standard setup where the axes intersect at the listening position?
Second, What SPL do you use for your standard critical listening?
You state the 9700 has two primary advantages over the 9500, detail and transient. Looking over the spec sheets I am wondering if the detail is just because the 9700 has a hotter top end.
I think an interesting comparison would be to boost the 9500, 1 db between 7-11k, and 2db 11-20k, and then compare to the 9700.
If you are against eq, or don't have that capability that's cool, I am just throwing out that suggestion for food for thought.
Thanks for your time,
Mike
5th Element, thank you for your review, it is hard to find reviews on expensive drivers.
I do have some questions however.
In your setup, what is your toe in, and listening distance? Do you do a standard setup where the axes intersect at the listening position?
Second, What SPL do you use for your standard critical listening?
You state the 9700 has two primary advantages over the 9500, detail and transient. Looking over the spec sheets I am wondering if the detail is just because the 9700 has a hotter top end.
I think an interesting comparison would be to boost the 9500, 1 db between 7-11k, and 2db 11-20k, and then compare to the 9700.
If you are against eq, or don't have that capability that's cool, I am just throwing out that suggestion for food for thought.
Thanks for your time,
Mike
mbutzkies said:
Oh I have plenty of EQ and have altered the 97's top end to cool it down a little bit and have in the past boosted the 95's just to see what its like.
The listening I did when comparing the two drivers was done with a very different set up then I use now. Pretty much same drivers different application, before it was all closed boxes, now there is no boxes anywhere, its all dipole.
Appart from that when originally comparing the two I was probably less then 10 degrees off axis so not enough really to curtail any of the higher frequencies or affect them in any significant way.
I have measured the 97's in the baffle I am using now and although I dont remember precisely how they measured, I do know that they are flat from about 500hz up to quite high, certainly nothing there to cause concern. From what I remember I was quite surprised at how flat they were expecting them to be more like the scan graph.
I personally dont believe the slight increase in output in the top end would be enough to make it sound more detailed, yes brighter, but not with more detail. Most of the information in the music is below 10khz, above that just adds air and sparkle to the sound. I just added simple EQ to compensate for the rise in the scan and to be honest the difference is so small its not really worth worring about. I think room acoustics would play a much larger role in the high frequency energy presented to the listener then a small 1-2dB difference in output rising in the last octave or so.
Either way it is something worth considering and a question thats good to ask, but when I first put in the 97 I was expecting the sound to be brighter but it wasnt.
The thing that left the biggest imprint on me was in holst's planets, Murcury at about 2 mins 30 seconds there are violins playing very quietly and its was the speed at which the 97 managed to stop and start between notes that really stuck out as an improvement over the 95. The 95 is still a very impressive device and I would say is the easier of the two to work with, but if you want better the 97 does do it. You dont need golden ears either both my mum and dad thought it sounded noticeably better and they dont say things just to make me happy. I went dipole mids and my ma said she prefered it closed box.
I listen at varying SPL, the violins in the holst tune are very quiet even when you have the volume turned up. I also like to thrash the voice coils occasionally to. Both the 97 and 95 handle power with ease.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.