Well yeah but 'acoustical figure of merit' is a whole new level of marketing BS which I did not expect from a company that is serving the pro market.
Probably wouldn't have batted an eyelid if that horse manure would have come from SB rather than Eminence.
Having worked in engineering for 30 years, I can read between the lines and guess what "acoustical figure of merit" might mean...
The engineers at Eminence came up with a way of ranking diaphragm materials based on a number of attributes. this ranking method probably distilled all these attributes down into a single ranking number... which they coined as an "acoustical figure of merit"...
The marketing people, upon hearing the engineers talk about how Textreme has an incredibly high "acoustical figure of merit", foamed at the mouth and wet themselves... they then pushed these words into their marketing material... probably without the knowledge of the engineering folks.
I have seen this playbook many times...
The engineers at Eminence came up with a way of ranking diaphragm materials based on a number of attributes. this ranking method probably distilled all these attributes down into a single ranking number... which they coined as an "acoustical figure of merit"...
The marketing people, upon hearing the engineers talk about how Textreme has an incredibly high "acoustical figure of merit", foamed at the mouth and wet themselves... they then pushed these words into their marketing material... probably without the knowledge of the engineering folks.
I have seen this playbook many times...
Comparing to the Be version, we might look at a result of material resonance. The Be is smoother all the way which is also evident in Bliesma T25B-6 Be tweeter. Due to this TX resonance and cone breakup, it cannot sound equal to that of its Be counterparts. Hold that thought since we have not seen any THD / IMD measurements yet. Satori motor is the same and voice coil, so only thing left is resonance or enhanced internal reflection or a combo.
Wrt diaphragm materials, an "acoustical figure of merit" would ideally be based on basically 3 acoustic properties: stiffness, (low) density, and internal damping.
The TexTreme biaxial weave has low density, but a triaxial weave - composed of three sets of yarns, which intersect and interlace with each other at 60 degree angles - has superior tensile properties compared to bi-plain and biaxial woven yarns. In addition, triaxial woven fabric has the ability to maintain structural integrity.
Attachments
Last edited:
Before you get too worked up regarding the 15k dip, it's the wrong graph. It's the same as the two 21mm tweeters. Check the pdf instead.
Similar to Hoffman's Iron Law (bass extension vs. efficiency vs. enclosure size), in general - as regards to traditional materials, you can only have 2 of the 3 properties (stiffness, (low) density, and internal damping) for a specific application.
For high frequency reproduction you'd want the stiffness of the triaxial weave (reduced breakup), but the higher density is prohibitive.
For high frequency reproduction you'd want the stiffness of the triaxial weave (reduced breakup), but the higher density is prohibitive.
Last edited:
I was thinking almost the same thing. I was expecting a response very similar to the Be version, but less expensive... maybe not...
Ro808 - I don't know if the textreme diaphragm is a single layer, it may be, but I tend to doubt it... if it is multi layers, they could use a combination of 0/90 and +45/-45 layers exclusively. it is not necessary to use 0/60/120 triaxial to achieve a good laminate. In aerospace applications, we almost always use 0/90 and +45/-45 layers. So without more knowledge of what Oxeon is doing, I am hesitant to lay blame on the 0/90 layup.