Visaton KE 25 SC design

[blue934]

What OEM designs use the Visaton KE 25 SC? I'd like to listen the this tweeter in action before committing to purchase it.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130813050300/http://www.visaton.com/en/chassis_zubehoer/ht_kalotten/ke25sc_8.html

David

[JonMarsh]

I bought a pair of these to evaluate a few years back from eSpeakers and wasn't too impressed with extension or distortion performance. YMMV, of course!

I don't like to comment negatively about products. Maybe they've improved since then, but I'd recommend the Transducer Labs N26 instead, similar price class. A round plate version of that is coming soon, I've heard.

[blue934]

that's interesting to hear Jon. with my 45yr old construction workers ears, extension and top octaves are key to my tweeter enjoyment.
David

[JonMarsh]

Well, my 61 year old ears can still appreciate a cleaner tweeter, because lower harmonic distortion also means lower IM distortion. :W And while I can't hear above 18 kHz, I've found that tweeters with high upper resonant peaks are a problem due to IM that folds down in the audible range, resulting from the resonance amplification of distortion products. Basic motor linearity and chamber resonance as well as suspension behavior affects performance in the lower ranges, of course. It's possible to make a very good inexpensive tweeter, like the Seas 27TDFC, but it takes some good engineering- lots of people don't come close to the level we take for granted from Scanspeak and Seas, for example.

Same thing can happen with midrange, drivers- one of the reasons why to me the Accuton C173-6-90 is much cleaner than say, the Accuton C173-6-191. They LOOK the same from the front, but boy they sure do measure and sound different. The Transducer Labs N26 is the least expensive good quality ceramic tweeter I've tested, at about $130 each.

Image not available

It compares quite favorable with the Accuton ceramics, other than it's bigger and heavier because of the conventional magnet system- but it does use a very powerful magnet structure for it's type, in order to keep the sensitivity up.

[neuro]

Hmm, at Madisound right now the C173-6-90 is $907, the C173-6-191 is $394. I wonder if there is a difference in manufacturing cost commensurate with the price difference or if the two are only subtly different in construction (hence having almost identical manufacturing cost) and the price difference is mostly due to performance.

[Face]

The 090 has anti-resonant treatments done to the cone, but the biggest difference in expense are the 090's neo magnets.

[richnen]

Hmm, at Madisound right now the C173-6-90 is $907, the C173-6-191 is $394. I wonder if there is a difference in manufacturing cost commensurate with the price difference or if the two are only subtly different in construction (hence having almost identical manufacturing cost) and the price difference is mostly due to performance.

The C173-6-90 uses a Neodymium Magnet which is likely the difference in cost as well performance.

[JonMarsh]

The 090 used a relatively massive (read expensive) neodymium motor BECAUSE it uses an under hung motor assembly which requires a very strong magnetic field because of the length of the gap- the VC is normally completely in the gap, which together with the copper lining reduces the distortion and increases the sensitivity. The effects can be seen in the distortion plots in the driver data sheets, which are not overstated- my own measurements confirm the performance. It also seems that the resonance damping in the cone are more effective at suppressing harmonic amplification, as Face notes, and have been told by an OEM using the 090 that this is also a more expensive process.

[neuro]

Thanks for the insight. Looking too quickly at the thumbnail images I missed the telltale ferrite band on the 191.
With the clamping down on rare-earth supply, I wonder if a midrange (between ferrite and neo) option will become popular. I have no idea where Alnico falls on the cost scale. It currently appears to be more rare than neo, but in the past I believe is was the performace option.

[JonMarsh]

For reference...

Note X axis, frequency, not scaled exactly the same. Distortion axis (Y) is scaled identically.

C173-6-191

Image not available

C173-6-191E Distortion from Accuton Data sheet






C173-6-090 Distortion from Accuton data sheet