Analytical or Laid Back

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
The analytical vs the laid back loudspeaker.

I have auditioned multiple loudspeakers since I discovered that which fit the high end description and managed to hone in on what I personally like. And what I personally like is somewhat of an issue, allow me to explain. There are generally two types of loudspeaker categories: The analytical and the laid back or "dampened" loudspeaker. I think its fairly easy to draw the conclusion that laid back is the dominant group with perhaps more than 80% of the market and this is to a degree mind boggling to me, and to shed some light on the matter, I think I need to explain my perspective.

I have a reference instrument for tweeters and that is the triangle instrument.

41XfY5BfCML._SX425_.jpg


While there are differences between them, be that quality or size, they have one thing in common: A unique acoustical signature with complex harmonics and decay. I will go so far as to say that it is instantly recognizable, but will leave some room for "no its not". And with that reference, lets get into the core of why I started this thread.

There are generally speaking, 4 types of tweeters:
- Soft Dome
- Hard Dome
- Ribbon or Foil
- Plasma.

- Each type has its advantages and disadvantages and I have personally not listened to every tweeter ever produced, that might be an impossible task, but I have listened to what can be considered cheap or high quality in each category and sometimes the difference between a bad and good one within the same category bridges the gap's and make it difficult to conclude what type it is.

- This indicate to a degree that the material itself is less important and that other quality's of the tweeter make up a larger portion of that which signify the over all performance.

- Personally, I used to look at two factors: Frequency response and material. While this can tell you certain things, its by no stretch of the imagination enough. And you will often hear statements such as; "you are listening with your eye's, that will never work, you have to actually listen with your ears in order to judge a speaker driver". And I do agree on this statement. But... There is one type of measurement that will reveal so much in fact that you can almost tell before you listened whetter it is going to be worse or better than X. This type of measurement look at the harmonic / distortion in the driver.

- And finally, we can include cone breakup. Regarding cone breakup, there is a rule. Hard domes have a more pronounced breakup and when it happens, it hits hard, while soft domes is less pronounced and well, softer aka its more discrete. This soft and discrete breakup can be and are by many seen as a superior advantage. The downside can be speculated as stretched out into lower regions where it contribute to a damping factor as such that harmonics is introduced and mess up the fundamental.

- So, lets get back to the triangle instrument. Very few tweeters manage to playback a recording of this instrument without discoloration or a general damping factor which removes the HF behavior and harmonics, and my impression is that one of the reasons that what I consider poor tweeter quality is used in 80% of loudspeakers is down to 2 reasons.

  1. The general public cannot hear higher frequency's (>12kHz) that well and therefore things are hidden or masked for them.
  2. The general public has not be educated in listening for details as with the triangle instrument as a reference and are therefore not aware of information this instrument provide - which is more than the fundamental and harmonics.
- As for me, for good and bad, I can hear things up to 18kHz, so for me, 10-18kHz often contain a large amount of acoustical information, its natural for me, and so when playback is damped, I notice, simply because it is a deviation from that which is normal.

- Regarding training. I tested my teases on a friend who also has excellent hearing and used 2 different loudspeakers [A Dali with soft dome tweeter and B&W 800 diamond which is a hard dome]. I was amazed that he was unable to pickup the differences even if they where there. I then explained to him to listen for the triangle instrument and played on one to give him a fresh reminder how it sounds in real life to freshen up his memory. All of a sudden when we again listened to both loudspeakers, he had no problems distinguish between both loudspeakers and the differences was not subtile anymore. Not only did he suddenly hear things in the HF region but started to notice much more in the MF and LF. It was as all obstacles was removed for him.

- Two individuals is not enough to draw any objective conclusion, but it is for me personally.

- I have gathered some tweeters (8) that are well known and included their fundamental and harmonic response (see attachment). And just to give you an idea of what is good and bad. The SB Acoustics TW29B and Accuton BD25-6-258 has been hailed as among the best, spite the huge price difference. Closely followed by the SEAS 22TAF/G which is despite its modest price is regarded as a very competitive driver compared to many times more expensive ones. To the mystery of "Why does this tweeter sound better than X" is perhaps not as mysterious after all if we look at harmonic distortion. The lower distortion the cleaner the fundamental will be.

- In the end, acoustical behavior can be viewed from a physics perspective, charted and defined. It is one thing to have a personal preference where psychoacoustics play a huge role as it does for all of us, and it is another to say this should affect the objective side of things, that is just wrong.

- To give you and idea that price is NOT the quality revealing factor, take a look at the behavior between one of the worlds most expensive tweeter, the Accuton BD25-6-258 and the more modest (but still expensive) Viawave foil tweeter.

I will end on this note. What say you. How come the market is filled with fairly damped tweeters and drivers in general ? is it a pure production cost affect or is it more related to what people are used to ?

Oneminde
 

Attachments

  • tweeter_freq.resp_vs_harmonics.jpg
    tweeter_freq.resp_vs_harmonics.jpg
    658.8 KB · Views: 398
  • Harmonics.jpg
    Harmonics.jpg
    363.6 KB · Views: 399
I'm not sure that you can listen to 2 different tweeters in 2 different loudspeakers and conclude that the difference is due to harmonic distortion in the tweeter. There are so many other factors that may account for the difference, most importantly frequency response and off-axis response. It may be harmonic distortion, but then it would have occur between ~2KHz and 9KHz or lower depending on your individual hearing and most decent tweeters have very low distortion in this area.
 
You bring up an interesting argument which many do, and that is: There are too many differences - This indicate that loudspeakers cannot be compared UNLESS they are equal in terms of cabinet and x-over.

Should one also - perhaps - conclude with: Drivers cannot be judged individually, only as a whole package together with complimentary drivers, cabinet and crossover filter ?
 
Very nice presentation of data.

How do these measurements correlate to performance in the "triangle test"? Of course, crossover and implementation means a lot to overall speaker performance, but the triangle by itself might be a suitable test for the raw driver.

Peace,
Tom E
 
.

Hi Tom


In terms of tweeter problems generally, in the 80% of speakers you mention ...

... my personal experience says it is simply the electrolytic capacitor in those 80% that is often the main culprit !


I have DIYed most of my speakers for 40 years & simply always used polypropylene capacitors.

I've been SPOILT !


A good friend who is less keen with the saw, has always bought speakers

( within my idea of your 80% )


B&W something from the late '80s he did have for a while ...

... nice speaker, sounds OK, then you swap the capacitor for an 'ordinary' MKP ...

... WOW ! chalk & cheese !!


First time I showed him THAT, he felt like he'd just got the 805s, or whatever he couldn't afford !!


A couple of years later, his new B&W DM602s got the capacitor binning job as well ...

... WOW ! what soundstage ( which was already pretty darn good ! ) what clarity at last !


£5 spent on some 'Solen' 2x 4.7uF & 2x 10uF ... absolutely NO ! snake oil ... just brilliant !!


He said to me :- " Why don't they put 'em in ALL the models if it's so cheap to do so ? "

Why indeed ?

Perhaps they wouldn't sell so many of the more expensive models ? !


My JBL Control 1s on the kitchen wall here.

BOOM ! ... New tweeter capacitors ... a £2 upgrade + an air-cored inductors & 'Neutrik' Speakons(TM) on those as well.


Pretty cheap a$$ looking tweeter ... sorta.

That capacitor swap, plus taking the silly protector/diffuser thingy off ...

... & a thin mini grill-cloth circle just for the tweeter.

( JBL metal grills were long gone in the dumpster )

WOW ! ... Not bad for the kitchen & a £3 uprade !


I have a pair of DIY Jordan JX92s as well, no tweeter OR capacitor of course ...

... not everyones cuppa char ...

... I just play the bumpin' house, Wagner & Thomas Koner on my DIY transmission lines !

( MKPs fitted of course )


Si.

t.S.E.c

.
 
.

Whooops ... wrong ^^ name.

Should have been ... Hi Oneminde.

Si.

t.S.E.c

.

I was wondering what you were going on about!

Besides, I am almost certain that anyone interested in this thread is pretty far beyond using 'lytics in their tweeter xover. I took the 'lytics out of my B&W DM6's 30+ years ago.

And I now use very high quality film/foils for my SB Satori TW29RN's. I wonder how those compare to the beryllium tweeters shown here. They sure sound good to me.

Peace,
Tom E
 
Last edited:
.

" I think its fairly easy to draw the conclusion that laid back is the dominant group with perhaps more than 80% of the market and this is to a degree mind boggling to me "

- - - - - - - :eek:

Just agreeing with the original poster. ;)

& speculating that the 80% of "laid back" designs may well have poor capacitors fitted. :(


If for example B&W DM602s (not exactly cheap) have electrolytic capacitors in ...

... it's fair to say that perhaps 80% of the market does as well. :rolleyes:


The REAL question is WHY ? :confused:

Perhaps this is the DESIRED effect & really NOT about budget after all. :$: :$: :$:


Just thinking OUTSIDE of the box. :Pirate:


Si. :)

t.S.E.c

.
 
Take 2 physically identical dome tweeters. One has a, say 28 mm softdome, the other a 28mm titanium.

Suppose the tweeter is part of a well designed 3 way system.

Optimize the hi-pass sections of the tweeter filter in such a way that these sections, loaded by the tweeter, yield identical acoustic transfer functions/output.

You will not be able to distinguish between the tweeters.

Forget about THD or capacitors, it is the on-axis and off-axis behaviour of the entire hi-pass section.

Laid back is usually the result of a recessed power response/off axis dip in the mids, not the tweeter.
 
Very nice presentation of data.

How do these measurements correlate to performance in the "triangle test"? Of course, crossover and implementation means a lot to overall speaker performance, but the triangle by itself might be a suitable test for the raw driver.

Peace,
Tom E
The triangle test came about gradually. The short story is that over the years while discovering that loudspeakers and especially the tweeters, sounded different. As I auditioned more and more loudspeakers, it seemed to me that one driver in particular either made the loudspeaker average or really stand out as clear, transparent and detailed - what many call analytical or forward. This led me to look for a common factor or a factor that I could trust would tell me how close or far the loudspeaker / tweeter is to sounding neutral and real. This turns out to be the triangle instrument, often used in classical music / orchestral. And behold, indeed it was a remarkable "simple" evaluation tool. Sibilance or the broken "S" is on 2nd place after the triangle, and 3rd we have the female voice as part of the test. Why ? well, as I mentioned, the triangle instrument is very unique in how it sounds. Some metal pipes have the same behavior and signature and I would say that most people can recognize it fairly easy. Then it becomes a matter of how accurately or not it sounds when played back - assuming that we have a good recording from the get go.

PS: It appears as each humans have a unique auditory system, rendering each triangle signature unique, but within a reasonable window of performance. So even if I can't translate to you personally how I hear it, we can arrive to the conclusion that it is the same or very similar instrument we are listening to, and in reference to IRL draw the conclusion, how similar the playback sound.

As with tube amplifiers which have elevated 2nd and 3rd harmonics, does amp's have a warm tone to them or we can say they are midrange forward. Knowing how does sound compared to a good Class A/B solid state amp which more often than not have a much cleaner and crisper sound, we know that the difference in large comes from the difference in regards to harmonic distortion or THD.

Having auditioned many loudspeakers and tweeters, remembering how they sound, what material they where made of and chasing down harmonic measurements, I started to see evidence for corelation between: How detailed and neutral it was compared to presence of harmonics. I know how the SB Beryllium, SEAS 22 TAF/G and Accuton Diamond sound like and so far (without auditioning the Viawave tweeter which I will do) the Accuton Diamond and SB Beryllium are the only two who, with a reasonable amount of "artificial" playback, renders the triangle instrument very nicely.

Real life performance is difficult as we all know and is one of the reasons we actually audition and/or design loudspeakers and I will assume it is because we want to come close to experience the musical recording as if we are actually there when the musicians are playing and singing.

Regarding loudspeakers and how the drivers perform in relationship to choices made for the cabinet and filter, I would imagine it matters yes. As an example. The accuton diamond in my case was heard through some Marten loudspeakers, so Tidal which use the same tweeter might have done a better or worse job, but for now, I can't say one or the other is doing better or worse and can only say that the Accuton diamond is in its own league of tweeters and in regards to the triangle instrument :). In order to balance out things, YG Acoustics Hailey 1.2 does a much better job for everything els compared to Marten, but lacked the finest details in the top end which the Marten could since it used the diamond tweeter.

I hope this answers your question ;)
 
.In terms of tweeter problems generally, in the 80% of speakers you mention ... my personal experience says it is simply the electrolytic capacitor in those 80% that is often the main culprit !

t.S.E.c.
I am not qualified to argue for or against electrolytic caps, but if I understand you correctly, you are saying the solid electrolytic caps or PP have more details to them or they are more neutral and true to the music ?
 
speculating that the 80% of "laid back" designs may well have poor capacitors fitted. <snip>
I am using that entire argument in my reply because, you might be on to something. Does capacitors affect the signal ? ... yes, yes it does. There's been multiple tests on different types of capacitors where the goal was to look for neutrality or if the cap modulated or colored the signal. Not how it sounds, but if it does something unwanted to the signal, and the evidence are there. As you mentioned earlier, you replaced the caps in does B&W and experienced a pleasant and positive change. Good for you.

The question is then: Why does the market contain so many "fluffy" and laid back loudspeakers if its unnatural ?
 
There are generally speaking, 4 types of tweeters:
- Soft Dome
- Hard Dome
- Ribbon or Foil
- Plasma.

Have you ever listened to / considered horn-loaded metal ring radiators?

(E.g., like these)

In my experience, nothing touches them in terms of accurate reproduction of high-frequencies and transients - provided that they are crossed over properly to only operate in the range where they are "comfortable" (usually > 6 - 8 kHz, depending on the size of the diaphragm and horn).
 
Regarding horn super tweeters, not that I am aware of. Might have listened to one or two without paying attention in the 90's. No matter, I would need to do so now that I consciously am working on loudspeakers.

Any particular recommendations which you have personal experience with ?
 
Take 2 physically identical dome tweeters. One has a, say 28 mm softdome, the other a 28mm titanium.

Suppose the tweeter is part of a well designed 3 way system.

Optimize the hi-pass sections of the tweeter filter in such a way that these sections, loaded by the tweeter, yield identical acoustic transfer functions/output.

You will not be able to distinguish between the tweeters.

Forget about THD or capacitors, it is the on-axis and off-axis behaviour of the entire hi-pass section.

Laid back is usually the result of a recessed power response/off axis dip in the mids, not the tweeter.

I have found this to be true for 3-way speakers. Laid back seems to be around the 800Hz - 3KHz range. give or take.
 
From what I know about driver design, mind you, never having designed one, I assume the inductance of the voice coil is carefully adjusted so as to roll off the on axis high frequency response of the tweeter just as its response starts to rise due to high frequency beaming. Of course this results in a rolled off power response. Varying values of this inductance relative to the tweeter diameter may be the "Laid back" factor.
 
@ Speaker Dude: Midrange is 500-2kHz, so that would fit your area. And its interesting to see comments regarding capacitor material. I know for a fact that the SEAS tweeter used in the PMC Twenty5 series sound rather okay and PMC use MKP caps. Its more distinct in its Fr transition than B&W Diamond, Accuton ceramic / diamond etc, so I would call the SEAS too forward, but would not have any issues incorporating it together with a capacitors that suits it. Adjust how laid back or forward it is with the capacitors is indeed an attractive situation.
 
Last edited:
From what I know about driver design, mind you, never having designed one, I assume the inductance of the voice coil is carefully adjusted so as to roll off the on axis high frequency response of the tweeter just as its response starts to rise due to high frequency beaming. Of course this results in a rolled off power response. Varying values of this inductance relative to the tweeter diameter may be the "Laid back" factor.
A power factor you say... hmm. How do you academically connect impedance and acoustical performance ? I come from the Fr response and harmonics perspective and would love to hear more about yours. Impedance or damping do indeed change how much power can be delivered from the amplifier, but that is an SPL aspect. Like when I adjust the volume, the SPL goes up and down, but that does not affect the overall acoustical performance in terms of laid back or forward - well, until you get uncomfortably loud and cone breakup is present further down in its Fr band, but that is SPL distortion ... Two different things :)
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.