Testing 1, 2, 3, testing...

[Jim Holtz]

Mark and Jed,

I'd really hoped that the H1283 would be an interesting part to try with waveguide, but it's chaotic upper breakup mode doesn't inspire me to play with it- too much like the H1212.

~Jon

Hi Jon,

I've been following this thread with great interest. I hope you make a sticky out of it. Thank you for your hard work!

I noticed that you seem to be cooling towards the H1212 a bit because of the high end break up mode. Do you prefer the H1189 because of that?

Thanks!

Jim

[JonMarsh]

To be fair, I'll have to drop them in and listen... but that dome mode is really bonkers, and it can be stimulated by HD products. Now, I didn't expect it to be nice and mild mannered like the RS28a, but both the H1212 and H1283 were much worse than published data. Whereas, other parts are pretty similar- including the H1189.

Next weekend: Focal Tc120dx2. Hopfully some off axis stuff on the Accutons.

[cotdt]

Very interesting... hey Jon how about some high output testing, say at 120 or 130dB. Would that be more indicative of problems in the tweeters?

[Paul W]

Jon,
That C23-6 is looking good! Now I gotta hold my breath while you wait for your C90-T6 and C24-6s. What ETA is Madisound giving for the C90?

Question on the C23. I have never seen one live and am having difficulty getting perspective through the grill on the web. What does the transition from the edge of the inverted dome out to the intersection of the grill and faceplate look like?

I'm (guessing) the transition may form a shallow conical waveguide. If so, I wonder if a "knife edge" 120 degree conical waveguide would make a reasonable match at the grill/faceplate intersection. In other words, rather than a roundover transition to a conical waveguide, just extend the waveguide that (may) already start near the inverted dome. Does this look like it has any possibilities?
Paul

[JonMarsh]

Very interesting... hey Jon how about some high output testing, say at 120 or 130dB. Would that be more indicative of problems in the tweeters?

I don't know what kind of tweeters you're testing, but the only drivers that will hit 120-130 dB at one meter are hornloaded compression drivers. And the tweeters tested here are showing enough problems in most cases at these levels. Would you buy a power amp with rated distortion of 1%? The best drivers I know of right now are in the 0.2% - 0.3% range at 93-100 dB, and we're talking $460 a pop for a midrange, or $230 for a tweeter.


If you want to see how some of them look when you make them cry "moma", look at Mark K's test pages with tri-tone tests (800 Hz, 1 kHz, and 1200 Hz) at high levels. With dome tweeters the usual upper range is around 110 dB, and they're not very happy at that point. Distortion products down only 20 dB or a little more from the fundamental.

Of course, if you're listening at 120 to 130 dB at one meter at home, you won't have to worry too much about what the tweeters will be doing after a few years...

[JonMarsh]

Jon,
That C23-6 is looking good! Now I gotta hold my breath while you wait for your C90-T6 and C24-6s. What ETA is Madisound giving for the C90?

Question on the C23. I have never seen one live and am having difficulty getting perspective through the grill on the web. What does the transition from the edge of the inverted dome out to the intersection of the grill and faceplate look like?

I'm (guessing) the transition may form a shallow conical waveguide. If so, I wonder if a "knife edge" 120 degree conical waveguide would make a reasonable match at the grill/faceplate intersection. In other words, rather than a roundover transition to a conical waveguide, just extend the waveguide that (may) already start near the inverted dome. Does this look like it has any possibilities?
Paul

The original firm ETA, which they've been trying to improve, was 90 days.

The edge of the C23 goes to a very flat surface, pretty much flush with the face of the driver. It's not like some of the Seas or other tweeters where you've got a miniature shallow horn for some 2-3 mm.

[jdybnis]

Hey Jon,

I'm only throwing ideas out for discussion. Interpreting data is hard enough when you do the measurement yourself and you are aware of all the compromises. When you just see the data it is harder to know what you are really looking at. Besides, typing on the computer is easy. :

Re the high Q breakup: Without a notch or lowpass filter a +20dB breakup is a bit frightening. The IM products folding down into to signal might be loud enough to be audible. I can also imagine rocking out at 95dB, using a "filterless" DAC as source. Next thing I know the dog is yelping, the bird is smashing itself into the side of the cage, and the cat is clawing at my face. :twisted: OTOH I can't see that lower frequency signals exciting the breakup through HD is a problem. When the breakup is excited by HD products, it's SPL is still at least 30dB down from the fundamental. I can't imagine that being audible directly or folding back down into audible range at a high enough level to matter.

[JonMarsh]

Well, there are other effects- the peaking in the H1212 or H1283 that I measure is quite different in effect looks like combinations of different modes at closely spaced frequencies. In some cases, VERY close to 20 kHz. Including deep notches.... I haven't measured it yet, but from looking at similar regions in cone drivers, I can guarantee you there will be some serious energy storage issues near those notches, regardless of what the farfield response measures. Actually, it's a lot like some of the older tweeters I've seen with elaborate phase diffusers, which are trying to improve dispersion, but also create ultrasonic resonances. They always sounded nasty.

That was when I learned (in the 80s') to try getting rid of the diffusers. That helped the MB Quart titanium tweeters considerably. With their diffuser, very spitty and sibilant. Without it, much smoother, but with a slight roll off in the top octave before the resonance.

I mean, look at the curves- which would you like better just on paper- the RS28a, the H1212, or the H1283?

Chris Darling has a pretty good ear, and he is not generally fond of metal tweeters, but he has said some nice things about the RS28a. OTOH, the H1212 drives him crazy...

Everyone has the right to make that decision for themselves, of course- I'm not the tweeter police here at HT Guide! But through years of experience I've found some general correlations regarding measurements and driver sound that have emerged from the general "noise" on this topic. For midwoofers, if I see a significant impedance glitch in the operating range, I've found it's pretty much always a sign of a mechanical discontinuity, which is generally a cone mode- sometimes a dip, other times a peak. In some cases, you get both for the price of one. And I never seem to like what I hear if I use a midwoofer or midrange in that area. A tweeter that looks spastic in the upper range is rarely both detailed and relaxing to listen to. (I'm biting my tongue to not say "never")

[AJINFLA]

Another reason I like inverted dome drivers. Tweeters, mids, woofers, you name it. I think it's probably the best possible cone design for dynamic voice coil drivers.

FYI, Jon have you seen the new Aura NS65 drivers in the Mad catalog http://www.madisound.com/pdf/aurasound.pdf ?
Inverted alu domes, neo motors with (I think) shorting rings, healthy xmax and a relatively mild peak. Lowish efficiency, but use 2, the price is right.
The new 10" sub reminds me of the Vifa 10" alu, but for more money.

Cheers,

AJ

[cotdt]

it looks like that Aura NS65 wants a low crossover point. why bother when you can just get an 8" or something. expensive too.

hey i got this titanium dome tweeter that has a sharp resonance peak at 19kHz, and boy does this sound metallic. most harsh and metallic tweeter i've ever heard. i can only hear up to 18kHz too, so i'm not supposed to hear it but the top end sounds very harsh anyway. i think maybe those ultrasonic resonances might be making them sound more metallic.

[JonMarsh]

FYI, Jon have you seen the new Aura NS65 drivers in the Mad catalog http://www.madisound.com/pdf/aurasound.pdf ?
Inverted alu domes, neo motors with (I think) shorting rings, healthy xmax and a relatively mild peak. Lowish efficiency, but use 2, the price is right.
The new 10" sub reminds me of the Vifa 10" alu, but for more money.

Cheers,

AJ

Even the little 4" unit on Madisounds sale page isn't bad in some regards as a possible midrange. But the NS-10-513 is a bit of an odd duck. Le must be pretty low, judging from the impedance curve. Xmax of 10 mm isn't much to write home about, the value proposition relative to RS265HF is open to question, unless shielded is an important factor. Looks like the cone is well behaved, given the first breakup peak is around 2.3 Kzh, no strange behavior below that, and no telltale impedance glitches below that. Good be a pretty fair part if it's linear within that 10 mm. 88 dB sensitivity rating looks questionable based on the plot. 12" is pretty similar. They're both pretty much "woofers", not subs. But that's not bad... if I wanted to do an Eidelon klone, the 12 could be fun. Looks like it would handle a 300 Hz crossover with ease, and sensitivity is rated 89.5 dB. Maybe they're actually plotting at one watt at four ohms, not 2.83 VRMS at 4 ohms.

[TacoD]

I think a low Le is a nice feature great impulse response.

[JonMarsh]

Lots of great things come from low Le- it's something that isn't paid enough attention by enough people.

[KJP]

Great information here Jon.

Any chance of posting some .frd and .zma files to share?

[TacoD]

Those measurements are useless, unless you want to make an openbaffle design .

[KJP]

I'm planning an inwall for a friend. :T

[JonMarsh]

Great information here Jon.

Any chance of posting some .frd and .zma files to share?

For the tweeters, or midwoofers, or? I still have the data, but it's not necessarily quite right even for an inwall, as at the main measurement distance for the midwoofers, there's a bit of dipole test baffle interaction, and at the nearfield, the response isn't quite the same as the on axis farfield for inifinite baffle would be. I.E., doesn't hide the warts. Pick the driver(s) you want, as I'd have to reload the files and extract the ASCII data files. To design with them, you'd have to add in the X,Y locations and the effective physical offset of the acoustical centers in the Z axis. (LspCAD reference) Even just guessing at the voice coil plane is usually close enough.

I didn't consider doing it for all the drivers because

1) I wouldn't want to use some of them particularly,
2) It's a lot of work, and time is a precious resource with the issues I have with my day job.

[Jim Holtz]

I’d really like to see some comments of listening to the H1212

Well, there are other effects- the peaking in the H1212 or H1283 that I measure is quite different in effect looks like combinations of different modes at closely spaced frequencies. In some cases, VERY close to 20 kHz. Including deep notches.... I haven't measured it yet, but from looking at similar regions in cone drivers, I can guarantee you there will be some serious energy storage issues near those notches, regardless of what the farfield response measures. Actually, it's a lot like some of the older tweeters I've seen with elaborate phase diffusers, which are trying to improve dispersion, but also create ultrasonic resonances. They always sounded nasty.

That was when I learned (in the 80s') to try getting rid of the diffusers. That helped the MB Quart titanium tweeters considerably. With their diffuser, very spitty and sibilant. Without it, much smoother, but with a slight roll off in the top octave before the resonance.

I mean, look at the curves- which would you like better just on paper- the RS28a, the H1212, or the H1283?

Chris Darling has a pretty good ear, and he is not generally fond of metal tweeters, but he has said some nice things about the RS28a. OTOH, the H1212 drives him crazy...

Everyone has the right to make that decision for themselves, of course- I'm not the tweeter police here at HT Guide! But through years of experience I've found some general correlations regarding measurements and driver sound that have emerged from the general "noise" on this topic. For midwoofers, if I see a significant impedance glitch in the operating range, I've found it's pretty much always a sign of a mechanical discontinuity, which is generally a cone mode- sometimes a dip, other times a peak. In some cases, you get both for the price of one. And I never seem to like what I hear if I use a midwoofer or midrange in that area. A tweeter that looks spastic in the upper range is rarely both detailed and relaxing to listen to. (I'm biting my tongue to not say "never")

Chris (CJD) and I were at the Chicago DIY event listening to the same speakers and we came away with different opinions. I was impressed with the sound of the H1212 which was in the speaker that came within .1 of a point of tying Chris’s TDFC/RS150 design for 1st place in the budget class. I also had the Natalie P’s there so all of the “big 3” budget tweeters were represented.

I found the H1212’s to be very smooth, detailed, full bodied and extended. I like the RS28 but it has a bit of a “dead” sound in the top end to my ears. Perhaps it's the dip in response in the 17K area I'm hearing, I don't know. I prefer the “air’ of the TDFC personally and I found the H1212 to be somewhere in between the TDFC and the RS28. The best of both, if you will.

I’m getting ready to build Dennis Murphy’s Seas H1212 version of the RS 3-way. Dennis and I emailed a lot during the development process and without putting words in his mouth, his comments mirror mine. I think John Krutke agrees as well based on his comments posted on his website. My whole point is that while I have no doubt that Chris is hearing something he doesn’t personally care for, I don’t think it’s a universal “sin” of the H1212. I know Dennis’s designs extremely well and I can guarantee that he would hear an issue with the tweeter if the break up mode was an audible problem.

Jon, how about popping the H1212 in place of the TDFC’s to give a 1st person perspective based on listening rather than just measurements? I’d really like to hear your thoughts on it and perhaps provide an additional view point.

BTW, thank you again for all of your hard work testing these tweeters. You, Mark K. and John Krutke have created an invaluable resource for the rest of the DIY community and you should be commended for your work.

Best regards,

Jim

[JonMarsh]

Chris (CJD) and I were at the Chicago DIY event listening to the same speakers and we came away with different opinions. I was impressed with the sound of the H1212 which was in the speaker that came within .1 of a point of tying Chris’s TDFC/RS150 design for 1st place in the budget class. I also had the Natalie P’s there so all of the “big 3” budget tweeters were represented.

I found the H1212’s to be very smooth, detailed, full bodied and extended. I like the RS28 but it has a bit of a “dead” sound in the top end to my ears. Perhaps it's the dip in response in the 17K area I'm hearing, I don't know. I prefer the “air’ of the TDFC personally and I found the H1212 to be somewhere in between the TDFC and the RS28. The best of both, if you will.

I’m getting ready to build Dennis Murphy’s Seas H1212 version of the RS 3-way. Dennis and I emailed a lot during the development process and without putting words in his mouth, his comments mirror mine. I think John Krutke agrees as well based on his comments posted on his website. My whole point is that while I have no doubt that Chris is hearing something he doesn’t personally care for, I don’t think it’s a universal “sin” of the H1212. I know Dennis’s designs extremely well and I can guarantee that he would hear an issue with the tweeter if the break up mode was an audible problem.

Jon, how about popping the H1212 in place of the TDFC’s to give a 1st person perspective based on listening rather than just measurements? I’d really like to hear your thoughts on it and perhaps provide an additional view point.

BTW, thank you again for all of your hard work testing these tweeters. You, Mark K. and John Krutke have created an invaluable resource for the rest of the DIY community and you should be commended for your work.

Best regards,

Jim

Thanks for the kind words, Jim.

I'm actually planning on doing that, (subbing the H1212 for the H1189- that's been on the roadmap quite a while, it's jujst been a time issue) plus finishing the felt diffraction control now that Praxis is up and running. Both measurements and listening. But I'll be putting on my "big guns" system for the listening (the one that the speaker cables cost twice what a system like the NatalieP goes for).

[Brian Bunge]

Jim,

I just checked Dennis' website and I don't see his version of the 3-way posted yet. Do you know when he plans to post that?

[KJP]

Well my main interest is in the 830883
Planning on it with an H1189

Were ordering parts today, I was thinking I could get a rough idea of crossover parts cost from your data.

If you dont think it would be good for that then dont bother extracting anything, I'll have my own data soon enough. Im not very patient.

[Jim Holtz]

Jim,

I just checked Dennis' website and I don't see his version of the 3-way posted yet. Do you know when he plans to post that?

Hi Brian,

I think Dennis sent everything to his webmaster so it should appear soon. If you want the design now, it's listed in the W-M/T-W center channel thread on page 6 I believe. You can also email me and 'll send you the whole thing in a zip file.

Jim

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks for the kind words, Jim.

I'm actually planning on doing that, (subbing the H1212 for the H1189- that's been on the roadmap quite a while, it's jujst been a time issue) plus finishing the felt diffraction control now that Praxis is up and running. Both measurements and listening. But I'll be putting on my "big guns" system for the listening (the one that the speaker cables cost twice what a system like the NatalieP goes for).

I like good equipment! I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Jim

[jdybnis]

Has anybody experimented with putting a low pass network on the tweeter. Specifically a higher order filter with a corner frequency where your hearing stops (between 16 and 17 kHz for me). Does it sound "rolled off" if there actually isn't any rolloff in the region where you can hear test tones?

[cotdt]

hi jon how about tests of some cheap diamond tweeters?

[ThomasW]

Has anybody experimented with putting a low pass network on the tweeter

Something along those lines.......

http://web.archive.org/web/20030618111131/www.vmpsaudio.com/nf.htm

hi jon how about tests of some cheap diamond tweeters?

You buy them and he'll be glad to test them.

[TacoD]

Something along those lines.......

http://web.archive.org/web/20030618111131/www.vmpsaudio.com/nf.htm

You buy them and he'll be glad to test them.

I also want to test those tweeters for some duration tests (> year).

[AJINFLA]

hi jon how about tests of some cheap diamond tweeters?

Cheap diamond :roll: ? You mean like some cubic zirconia tweeters? Who makes those? Stick with the plasma waveguides for now cotdt, still anxious to see those :W .

cheers,

AJ

[dlr]

Those Hales domes look good.

Thanks for the graphs, I think I'll be buying a pair of those domes. I'm surprised that

1. the resonant peak above 20K isn't that bad compared to some

2. that the area up to 20k stays relatively flat, lacking the characteristic dip that exists in the RS28.

Dave

[AJINFLA]

What motor do you plan to use Dave?

cheers,

AJ

[dlr]

DX25 and XT25

What motor do you plan to use Dave?

cheers,

AJ

I've got two pairs each of the DX25 and XT25 motors that I've already tested with some D26 and D27 domes. They do best on-axis with a small modification due to the over-large opening. The problem is that they are too dispersive. Yep, no mistake, they are too dispersive. The baffle diffraction is way up there when there's not even the small loading that the typical faceplate provides.

I made one of them a semi-shielded pair by gluing the old motor from the D26 onto the DX25 (backwards), since it's got no vent opening. That worked out alright, but it does concentrate the field directly on-axis behind the driver, not a problem for TV side placement.

I discovered the diffraction issue when I inserted them into an old Dahlquist box that had a center-mounted tweeter opening. I couldn't get rid of enough diffraction, even with a lot of felt, it was that strong.

I've got a shielded RS28, but haven't tried it yet. The dispersion at 90 degrees should be much lower. I suspect that the Hales dome will have less dispersion in the extreme off-axis, but that's only a guess at this point.

The DX25 and XT25 motors should prove an interesting comparison for the Hales tweeter dome. The DX is just the old D25-D27 variety, no chamber, blocked vent, no copper cap. The XT25 has the dual-chamber (as they call it) profile with the smallish rear chamber and has copper on the pole-piece. I plan to only buy two domes, so I'll probably put one on each motor type to test. If Mark is interested, I may send them to him for his distortion testing. I'm curious to see a comparison the same dome on different motors for distortion.

I'm also planning on adding a web page section for my "hybrids" only, though I do have some measurements posted in my raw measurements page, tweeter section.

[Jed]

I've looked at the C44 and it's very good. But I only compared it with the mdt55. There isn't alot in this range. Just not alot of dome type tweeters or 2" midranges. Still, it looks like the C23-6 or C24-6 will handle a lower xover. Maybe it should be mated to an 8"...

I've got to get my hands on some accuton tweeters...

Still looking for the holy grail 3/4 tweeter...

Hey Mark,

Could you post some of your results here for the C44s? I didn't see the info on your website. I'm thinking about a little speaker with a pair of RS180-8s in parallel or, depending on Jon's measurements, the RS180-4 in series in a 3-way configuration (RS180X2, C44, C12). Crossover points will be around 900-800 and about 4Kish. Suggestions? I'm not sure if many other woofers will outperform the RS180s in a compact 3-way if using a dome mid such as the C44 to cover the area where the RS180 starts to decline in performance.

Regards,
Jed

[capslock]

On the Peerless Exclusive drivers

Just happened to reread the Klang & Ton issue that had the new Peerless drivers in it (06/05 or 01/06). They tested 2nd, 3rd and 5th harmonics at 85 and 95 dB/1m. Even the 85 dB tests had 2nd and 3rd harmonic about 5 dB above Jon's results here, but the good news is that the 95 dB results were not much worse, i.e. at least at those levels, the driver does not come apart :-)

They also tested the smaller sibling 830882, and except for the below 100 Hz range, its distortion was actually slightly lower than for the 830883 across the band. On top of that, the FR and CSD (although I still don't have too much use for their CSDs) are more well behaved than for the larger driver.

It is interesting to note that the 882 has the highest Q_m and lowest R_ms of all the new HDS drivers, both according to the Peerless data sheets and the K&T tests. As this is not the byproduct of an usually low Bxl (as in some of the CSC series drivers), it might point to a nonconductive former, although I don't think they would have used a different former just on this one model.

The test also contained the PP and regular Nomex drivers of the same sizes. Their distortion spectrum was very similar to that of their Exclusive siblings, the only notable difference being about 5 dB of extra 3rd harmonic at 1 - 2 kHz, probably as a result of Le modulation.

Also, on the whole, the PP and especially the regular Nomex drivers had a cleaner FR in the 3 to 7 kHz range. I think this is in part due to the filtering provided by their higher Le, but in part it could actually mean that their cones have fewer break up modes in that region. This is understandable, because only the Exclusive series uses an extended former that results in two support points for the dustcap. While this will result in a more rigid structure, it might also invite high frequency resonances.

[JonMarsh]

Interesting comments, Eric. I should probably get a set of 830882 to test, though considering baffle masking and Sd, for the main applications I'm interested in, the 883 is probably a better choice. The 882 would make a nice box system midrange, I bet (250 Hz to 2 kHz).


The frequency response differences I expect, but I only plan to use the drivers up to about 2 kHz. Wish it was possible to get Klang & Ton in the US.

[capslock]

It is now:

http://www.lloxx.de/kt_emagazin.html

HH is still the better magazine, but not available online. However, HH have been slipping occasionally on tests, whereas KT have been improving for the last three issues or so. I haven't seen any wildly implausible distortion plots since they switched to dB scaling. Their CSDs, however, are still not as revealing and consitent as HH's.

[JoshK]

I guess I should have kept up with my German...

[noah katz]

"...the 882 has the highest Q_m and lowest R_ms of all the new HDS drivers, both according to the Peerless data sheets and the K&T tests. As this is not the byproduct of an usually low Bxl "

I believe Qms and Rms are purely mechanical parameters, so why would BL be relevant?

Thanks

[jdybnis]

Anybody know of a good German to English translation program/web site. Google makes a valiant effort at Klang & Ton but... :rofl:

Even if it seems at first sight differently around, a good idea is found often faster, than their execution begun. It does not even have to be the internal pig dog, which it applies to overcome. To incoming goods nig time, missing means, suitable tools, disproportionately high up did not wind - the reasons are various. The Resul did is absolutely merciless, offers it nevertheless to single lich the options "settled" and "not to erle digt". "why" is perfectly all the same thereby. Even the preceding estimate of the temporal and contentwise expenditure lies beside fast around orders of magnitude, because regularly the small, ungeliebten Problemchen inclusively-calibrates itself, which does not only cost us much time, but also years of our life. Thus or so similarly it was issued us with our web page. Dealer list, reader gallery, measuring data down load - all good ideas, only the execution the problem was so far. To be able themselves to take the time, lefonieren with dealers to width unit. To have available the capacities to place a gallery on the legs. To go around the unexpected problems, which the Download of measuring files brings with itself. All that had we beside the per duktion the booklet, which one does not bring times evenly in the hand turning to paper, bewaelti towards. For reasons mentioned the Web looks side today completely differently, than it was planned ursprueng lich. "dear one as never" may not be a particularly good resolution for the new year, become we us each free minute time to take nevertheless, in order to our InterNet late arises with lives to fill. Also the first hearing session, to 26. NO took place more vember 2005 in the buildings of the Brieden of publishing house, not to our fullest satisfaction ran. Despite the sudden beginning of winter nevertheless still another large part of the announced readers had come, but that was not also our actual concern. Many organizational acre beit in the apron, garniert with the cash transaction us up to the letzen Mi slot before arrival of the first guests time-robs, let sweat. Unfortunately everything was not perfectly prepared at this time. We drew from the first hearing session our teachings and sen to wis now, as we can make it better with next time on 28 January. There is it shown times again, how simply the theory and how practice complicates be can.

[JonMarsh]

You just need a few shots of Schnaps, then it all begins to make perfect sense....


Besides, I find it easier to approach Klang and Ton the same way as Playboy- ignore the erudite prose, and just look at the pretty pictures!

[jdybnis]

There is it shown times again, how simply the theory and how practice complicates be can.

[capslock]

"...the 882 has the highest Q_m and lowest R_ms of all the new HDS drivers, both according to the Peerless data sheets and the K&T tests. As this is not the byproduct of an usually low Bxl "

I believe Qms and Rms are purely mechanical parameters, so why would BL be relevant?

Thanks

A conductive former moving in the static B field of the motor will experience viscous (i.e. proportional to velocity) damping due to the formation of eddy currents. For the same former and voice coil, the damping will be lower if the motor is weaker.

An example is the Peerless CSC217 which has a Q_m of about 4.5 compared to something like 2.0 for the CSX217 and HDS205, which have the same former, but larger magnet.

[Jed]

Interesting comments, Eric. I should probably get a set of 830882 to test, though considering baffle masking and Sd, for the main applications I'm interested in, the 883 is probably a better choice. The 882 would make a nice box system midrange, I bet (250 Hz to 2 kHz).


The frequency response differences I expect, but I only plan to use the drivers up to about 2 kHz. Wish it was possible to get Klang & Ton in the US.

Jon,

You should take a look at the nextel W15LY as well. Although I think it has been stated that the peerless 882 has slightly lower distortion. Would be interesting to see what your tests reveal. I'm using the W15LY nextel driver with accuton C12 and RS225 woofer right now. I replaced the OW1 tweeter with the accuton C12 recently, and the C12 is excellent! Much more dynamic and clean from 3K on up than the OW1. I've tried dozens of different topologies with the OW1 and they just never could project female voices like the C12 can. When going back to the OW1, it seems a lot of information from the music is muted in comparision to the C12. I'd imagine the C13 is similar, but the C12 seems to have a lower resonance frequency. My experience with the accuton has me rethinking what audio should sound like. Truly remarkable drivers.

Jed

[capslock]

Looking at the tests of Nextel W15 in HH and KT magazines, I can only ask myself what they were thinking. The Nextels are probably marketings brainchild in order to have something to compete with Scan Speak.

[TacoD]

I do not think it's all marketing, some people choose their units based on what they like to hear. Nothing wrong with that, it's all a matter of taste.

[Mark K]

I do not think it's all marketing, some people choose their units based on what they like to hear. Nothing wrong with that, it's all a matter of taste.

I have to agree. Seas probably wanted a paper cone driver of some type. It has it's pros and cons, and also has a subjective following. Some OEM probably asked and got what they wanted.