SS Illuminator Tweets - 6040 vs 6640

[EWizard]

Is the quality of the 6640 really that much better?
The response sure does seem a lot better than the 6040.
It looks like it can handle more power as well.
Has anyone heard these two tweets back to back?

Scanspeak Illuminator D3004/6640-00 1" Tweeter Beryllium Dome

ScanSpeak Illuminator D3004/6020-00 Tweeter Textile Dome

I am wanting to pair with a if that helps:
Satori MR13P-8 5" Egyptian Papyrus Cone Midrange - 8 ohm

 

[ScottG]

Ironically I wouldn't choose either - even if I was keeping to a dome tweeter.



IF I was looking at a dome tweeter I'd probably choose this one (and pocket the change):

SB Acoustics SB26ADC-C000-4 Aluminum Dome Tweeter


OK, as to differences. The BE driver will have greater clarity as freq.s increase. Still, it's not a clarity I particularly care for - it emphasizes that "pin-point" character at the expense of 3D realism. The clarity is also excellent with regard to sources (or "images"), not terribly great with reflected sound (in the recording) except at *very* high freq.s - and even then not so great because of its reduction in dispersion.

The soft-dome's from Scan Speak are more natural sounding, if again - less detailed than the BE.


Ironically a tweeter I FAR prefer is this one:

SB Acoustics SB26STAC-C000-4 1" Textile Dome Tweeter

-while it has similar levels of clarity to BE drivers, that clarity is placed at lower level sound within the signal. The "image" is a bit noisier, but the lower level detail is altogether more apparent (..hall sound). Signal/EMF damping is important here - good cap's pay dividends with this driver - look to nice copper foil cap's from Audyn and use excellent resistors (Dueland) to avoid loosing detail (assuming passive crossover). It's easy for this tweeter to get "nasty" without proper implementation. Dispersion is excellent when compared to most other tweeters. Note: because this driver is noisier (in a linear respect), it tends to be slighty louder than a typical averaged response would present, this means that most people targeting a "flat" response with this driver usually end-up with a slightly elevated treble response.

The first tweeter I linked to "splits the difference" in subjective quality (between a BE tweeter and the SB soft dome), and has some added benefit with further increased linear excursion. It's also not as critical with crossover components. Objectivly it's one of the best dome tweeters you can purchase at any price.

 

[TMM]

FWIW the 6040 looks to have marginally smoother frequency response to me and doesn't have that peak at ~17kHz. That said, Scan-speak's published frequency response is not always 100% reliable. Both should be respectably smooth below 10kHz. The bump at 1kHz is due to the smaller rear chamber and can be easily dealt with in the crossover.

Reasons to get the 6640 instead: it's 1dB more sensitive, easier to machine a baffle due to being overall larger, might be slightly lower distortion around 1kHz allowing it to cross a few hundred Hz lower.

 

[GreatLaBroski]

I’ve owned both the smaller format Scanspeak D3004/6040 beryllium dome tweeters and D3004/6020 textile dome tweeters, I prefer the sound of the beryllium tweeters. A lot. I found the beryllium dome tweeters to be far more holographic and have a more realistic timbre than the silk domes. They’re both excellent however and I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend both.

 

[EWizard]

Ironically I wouldn't choose either - even if I was keeping to a dome tweeter.



IF I was looking at a dome tweeter I'd probably choose this one (and pocket the change):

SB Acoustics SB26ADC-C000-4 Aluminum Dome Tweeter


OK, as to differences. The BE driver will have greater clarity as freq.s increase. Still, it's not a clarity I particularly care for - it emphasizes that "pin-point" character at the expense of 3D realism. The clarity is also excellent with regard to sources (or "images"), not terribly great with reflected sound (in the recording) except at *very* high freq.s - and even then not so great because of its reduction in dispersion.

The soft-dome's from Scan Speak are more natural sounding, if again - less detailed than the BE.


Ironically a tweeter I FAR prefer is this one:

SB Acoustics SB26STAC-C000-4 1" Textile Dome Tweeter

-while it has similar levels of clarity to BE drivers, that clarity is placed at lower level sound within the signal. The "image" is a bit noisier, but the lower level detail is altogether more apparent (..hall sound). Signal/EMF damping is important here - good cap's pay dividends with this driver - look to nice copper foil cap's from Audyn and use excellent resistors (Dueland) to avoid loosing detail (assuming passive crossover). It's easy for this tweeter to get "nasty" without proper implementation. Dispersion is excellent when compared to most other tweeters. Note: because this driver is noisier (in a linear respect), it tends to be slighty louder than a typical averaged response would present, this means that most people targeting a "flat" response with this driver usually end-up with a slightly elevated treble response.

The first tweeter I linked to "splits the difference" in subjective quality (between a BE tweeter and the SB soft dome), and has some added benefit with further increased linear excursion. It's also not as critical with crossover components. Objectivly it's one of the best dome tweeters you can purchase at any price.

Thanks for the input.
These will be in an active 3-way (with subs, so 4 way) so I needn't worry about the quality of the caps.

 

[ScottG]

I’ve owned both the smaller format Scanspeak D3004/6040 beryllium dome tweeters and D3004/6020 textile dome tweeters, I prefer the sound of the beryllium tweeters. A lot. I found the beryllium dome tweeters to be far more holographic and have a more realistic timbre than the silk domes. They’re both excellent however and I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend both.

Ironically the "3D" aspect probably has more to do with the "surround" (ring radiator's contribution - which is textile) and the chamber structure (..in addition to potentially some additional lower freq. extension, even if largely "cut" by the HP filter).

..the "xy" image location is largely at higher freq.s, where the "body" (3D) or dimensional image character derives lower in freq. (..with a typical "split" around 1.8 kHz).

 

[ScottG]

Thanks for the input.
These will be in an active 3-way (with subs, so 4 way) so I needn't worry about the quality of the caps.

-again, the aluminum SB would be preferable for that IMO.

As far as one BE driver over another, the most critical element is usually the rear chamber, with a close second being the profile and mass of the dome and ring radiator in addition to the amount of force the motor has in the gap.

-the more expensive driver you have linked to is almost certainly the better sounding driver.

 

[EWizard]

Would these 18mfd capacitors be overkill for an SB26Stac for an active setup?
I want to protect from pops, etc.
I am calculating that the 12 dB/octave rolloff would come out to approx. 800Hz.

Mundorf 18.0 mfd Supreme Caps

SB Acoustics SB26STAC-C000-4 1" Textile Dome Tweeter