Even dayton amt goes easily to 30-40kHz. See the spec for graphs.
https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton-Audio-AMTHR-4-Hi-Res-Air-Motion-Transformer-4-Ohm-275-096
https://www.parts-express.com/Dayton-Audio-AMTHR-4-Hi-Res-Air-Motion-Transformer-4-Ohm-275-096
Long time since I heard an AMT.
Planars... it's more than just the tweeter, it's the way they load the room. Maggies, IMHO, are outstanding, and a PITA to live with.
Ribbons... see Maggies. Although, I do love those big ribbons they put on monopole speakers. If I were to build one, I think I'd get a big ribbon to handle the high basss, mids and treble... and then kick in with a couple of 8 inchers as woofers. Do the crossover somewhere below Middle C.
Electrostatics.... if you can, go listen to the ML Neolith.... No, I can't afford them, but I heard them at the THE show in '19 and they were amazing speakers.
Right now I'm listening to a monitor with anodized aluminum drivers... very good sounding.
there are ones that go to 20khz, but they are also ones that start falling off at around 10khz, maybe these are just midranges disguised as tweeters
Avoid waveguide-loading with your design. Also make sure you have large round-overs or chamfers for the baffle edges to reduce “peeking”/higher Spl diffraction effects.
Budget choice would be HiVi QR1, which allows a lower crossover without a waveguide.
Non-budget choice would be Morel ET338-104.
RAAL tweeters - damped yet having high detail. Also - can’t cross very low with even their largest designs and still get good performance at higher Spl’s.
I like them, often much easier to integrate into a design, BUT as freq.s increase they typically loose “definition” (or stable image clarity) as you increase volume. Plus their off-axis performance is often inferior to most other high freq. solutions. Also, unless it’s a waxed-paper version the result is often a bit more “crispy” sounding. Sensitive to rear-chamber/loading and air resistance losses along with reflection issues.
Last edited:
Thats poor choice of amt.
Here is mundorf.
https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-the-amt-23cm1-1-c-air-motion-transformer-from-mundorf
Why avoid waveguides? You can easily end up with silky smooth sound from them that's very non fatiguing. And then by their very nature they help to dramatically reduce the effects from baffle edge diffraction.
Because their more directive nature tends to increase apparent Spl and also the transition from waveguide to baffle adds-in some added narrow-band diffraction (though it really depends on how “sharp” the angle is or how “deep” the waveguide is with respect to it being noticeable).
-basically unless you know how to design a loudspeaker with a waveguide you should avoid it if you are trying to minimize any “aggressive” result. I’m guessing that this poster does not know how to achieve this.
-basically unless you know how to design a loudspeaker with a waveguide you should avoid it if you are trying to minimize any “aggressive” result. I’m guessing that this poster does not know how to achieve this.
These are the raw responses - you of course compensate in the crossover design.
I don't belive in "material sound". But the material brings distinct properties, like non piston behaviour of silk. And this influences off axis behaviour, interaction with the room, sometimes THD etc.
T25S doesn't give a lot of off axis SPL over 10kHz. I don't like carpets for listening rooms (non linear dampening) - I would not use this tweeter in my design. But some people like that sound, for them this could be the right tweeter.
Smooth could be not to much hf energy in the room. It's always hard to transport listening impressions with words. Measurements are way easier - but most people don't understand them good enough to get the right conclusions.
And there are terms in psycho acoustics to describe sound (like "rough") - it's the job of the engineer to define the terms and make the correlation to the physics (= measurements)
It's not an easy task to compare speakers or membrane materials (with all the properties) without to much influence. This sometimes takes days and a special prototype and a special room to do so. A 2nd person to do the switching etc.
I can hear a difference between T25B and T25A in the room even when EQed to +-<1dB on axis - when recorded with a mic relatively close they vanish. So it's probably not the material alone but all of the effects following.
At the end of the day the listening experience counts. And I also do EQ away from linear if the experience is not right. (like with Dayton RS52AN - always needed to lower their level by 1-2dB)
Yes definitely. More reflected high frequency energy, as early reflections, do not sound pleasant to me. Random wider dispersion is not a good thing in my book.
Make sure you use a silky sounding crossover for your tweeter choice. For example cheap plastic caps sound exactly the way they are made ,plastic sound.
i covered once my desk and monitor with a thicker blanket and it definitely made a difference to the more pleasant side (highs sounded more crisp and accurate, with less of a "shrill" factor) if i remember correctly, unfortunaly this is unpractical and i think a narrow dispersion is the only way around it, i might keep this in mind...
yea i definitely read/heared a few times crossover component quality matters but i havent expierenced it myself yet
i will probably build first a cheap crossover and later build a more quality one and compare
Of course! A non waveguide design has to much off axis energy in the 2-6kHz range which is the most sensitive range of the ear. -> harsh. When adding THD at higher levels ...
A good waveguide evens this out and the sound is more consistant in the room. To say it in an easy to understand term - "this is the way". 😎
(you can counteract this behaviour with a dip in the on axis frequency response. But that's bad for a near field scenario cause it's not balanced in the nearfield)
I would not overestimate that without proper A/B comparison. Our brain is doing funny stuff ;-)
But I also didn't do the proper A/B myself (pretty low on the list nowerdays with great active systems) - so just do whatever feels right for you.
No, not “harsh”.
That’s usually an aspect of the driver itself and/or narrow-band diffraction, NOT reflections.
However,
Yes, very near/loud (typical) reflections can generate elevated higher freq.s owing to a subjective “brightness”: it’s a mild loudness effect. Most people usually adapt to this change within a minute of first hearing it as long as the effect is broad-band (and reflections are almost always broad-band). However it doesn’t mean that it’s OK or that you won’t have some sort of negative reaction.
In a desk setup though you could be experiencing a-typical reflections or even higher freq. diffraction effects. The only way you’ll really know if that is your problem is moving them (current loudspeakers) out into the room free from those added sources of reflection and diffraction and listening to them.
Nothing. Its the op, who claims that some amt tweeters have rollof after 10kHz.
My posts were reply to that.
OK, 'edgy' = 'sharp' to me, which IME is dustcap and/or suspension and/or diaphragm or all of the above, breakup modes.