Finalists vs. CanTiLenas

[miyami]

After discussing different speaker designs with various people, I am down to decide between a TL version of Jim Holtz's Finalists and Paul Kittinger's canTiLenas.
To decide between the two designs, I need your help.

Has anybody listened to these two speaker designs - the unmodified Finalists and the canTiLenas - and can give an impression of how the midrange and high frequency range compare?
Does anybody have opinions about how they might compare - it seems that the Finalist's midrange-TL design with a Vifa NE149W and the canTiLenas Morel MDM55 Midrange are quite different - not to mention a Ribbon tweeter against a dome tweeter?

And finally: Has anybody in the LA area built one of these speakers and is willing to demonstrate them?

Questions over questions......

Thanks very much in advance!

[Paul K.]

I'm replying primarily to subscribe just to see what responses you get. I doubt you will find anyone who's heard both and definitely not anyone whose heard both recently, but you never know.
Paul

[miyami]

bumb

Maybe I'm optimistic, but has somebody in the LA area built the original Finalists, and can share his experiences?

[Jim Holtz]

I think you'd get more feedback if you posted this on PE Tech Talk forum. There are several members that would have been in attendance the years Paul and I had our speakers at the Iowa DIY.

There are also some Finalists builders that frequent that board.

Jim

[miyami]

Jim, since I have your attention: I was reading Zaph's ribbon tweeter reviews, and he pretty much criticizes that the ribbon's "airy and sparkling sound" is only due to their specific distortion pattern. Another issue was of course vertical off-axis decline. What is your personal experience on how treble from a dome tweeter as in the Finalist and a ribbon tweeter as in the Statements compares ?

[Paul K.]

I've used both dome and ribbon tweeters and when properly implemented, primarily meaning they're not crossed too low, either can be very, very good. Also note that the ribbon tweeter in the canTiLenas is a short ribbon, the NeoCD1.0 and it has better vertical dispersion than a longer ribbon.

[Jim Holtz]

Jim, since I have your attention: I was reading Zaph's ribbon tweeter reviews, and he pretty much criticizes that the ribbon's "airy and sparkling sound" is only due to their specific distortion pattern. Another issue was of course vertical off-axis decline. What is your personal experience on how treble from a dome tweeter as in the Finalist and a ribbon tweeter as in the Statements compares ?

With no disrespect to Zaph, he simply doesn't like ribbons and has never said a nice word about them.

The facts are, the NeoCD3.0's are VERY low distortion from 4K on up and are comparable to the very best domes.

Myth #2 is they have little vertical dispersion. The facts are, they have superior horizontal dispersion and very good vertical that is similar to a typical 1" dome. The ribbon Paul used would have superior vertical dispersion to most domes because it's very short. The longer the ribbon, the more "focused" the soundfield is. It's also why such long ribbons are used in linearray designs to limit the vertical dispersion since they are used in a long line.

You can not use a ribbon like you do a dome. Ribbons need to be crossed high which is why Curt crossed the Statements around 3.7K. If you get much lower, you should consider a dome. The Finalists use a 5 1/4" mid so they needed to be crossed lower and a dome was the correct choice. It's also why I chose the RS28F. It has a very open airy sound that is similar to a ribbon.

This is subjective; Ribbons simply do a better job of recreating cymbals, high hats, triangles etc. than a dome does to my ears. If you like metal domes, you probably aren't going to care for the top end of any of the Statements or Finalists.

Now I'll get off my soap box. 8O

Jim

[miyami]

8)
Thanks very much. Your comments are very helpful, since I have never built a box with a ribbon, nor did I ever own a speaker with one.

[wolf_teeth]

I have heard both designs. I recently heard the Finalists at InDIYana on the last weekend of May. I heard the Cantilenas back in 2008, so it has been awhile. The Cantilenas have better, more textured, well-extended bass. The RS225 does not compete with the 22W/8857T-00, IMO. The RSS210HF-4 is a close second to the Scan, but at a much lower sensitivity level. The Cantilenas also play the woofer quite a bit higher due to the use of a dome-mid- and that is pretty much a requirement. This does not sound bad in fact, and has likely more bass texture due to using it higher. That's my opinion on that usage, as I've done the same in my Attitudes design. That said- both the Finalists and Cantilena seemed to be very seamless in their transitions from driver to driver. The Cantilena was xover'd by Rick Craig, and the Finalist by CurtC; both renowned at their craft. I feel the Cantilena might be a little more to the analytical side and the Finalist to the smooth side in terms of tonality/reproduction of the sound. The Finalists can be either open-back or sealed, so you have choices there, but I find the soundstage better open-back, imaging better sealed more often than not on many designs. I want the imaging- that lets me focus on where things are in the field in front of you. You can still have a large soundstage with a sealed-back design.

That said- I would honestly prefer the Cantilena over the Finalists. The MDM55 is an awesome midrange performer, the Scan woofer is only second to its larger siblings in bass, IMO, and the ribbon is sweet and honest. This is not to say that the RS225 is not a good performer- as I've heard it also do remarkable things in Paul's Alicantes, et al. The Scan is just- better. I've not had a long time to listen to the Vifa Neo line of midbasses, but they are highly regarded as well even if not yet one of my favorites. To me- the NE are not cheaper versions of Revs. I heard both that weekend, and have a set of Revs- just not on par to my ears, apples to oranges.

While I agree that ribbons vertical dispersion is better than some like to believe, I don't find it to be better than domes. If you stand up from sitting, and the design axis is at listening height- your top-end disappears unless you have a very small ribbon. The likes of HiVi RT1.3, BG Neo3, and the NeoCD1.0, minimize this some due to their vertical/horizontal size and ratio. Much bigger and you pretty much have to remain seated.

My 2c,
Wolf

[Rick Craig]

After discussing different speaker designs with various people, I am down to decide between a TL version of Jim Holtz's Finalists and Paul Kittinger's canTiLenas.
To decide between the two designs, I need your help.

Has anybody listened to these two speaker designs - the unmodified Finalists and the canTiLenas - and can give an impression of how the midrange and high frequency range compare?
Does anybody have opinions about how they might compare - it seems that the Finalist's midrange-TL design with a Vifa NE149W and the canTiLenas Morel MDM55 Midrange are quite different - not to mention a Ribbon tweeter against a dome tweeter?

And finally: Has anybody in the LA area built one of these speakers and is willing to demonstrate them?

Questions over questions......

Thanks very much in advance!

I designed the crossover for the Cantilena and am familiar with the drivers in the Finalist (with the exception of the Vifa midrange). I think the RS225 is a good woofer but better suited to being in a sealed design where it's augmented with a subwoofer. The Scan woofer in the Cantilena is very good but expensive and I think there are better options available at a lower cost. In Paul's design it was a great fit and met specific criteria needed for the TL enclosure as well as mating to the dome mid.

I recently did a dual 8" 3-way with Dayton RSS210 woofers, SB Acoustics Satori midbass, and a SB dome tweeter. The bass was exceptional (ported cabinet) and I would take this woofer over the RS225 or Scan. It could easily be mated with the Vifa mid and a variety of domes or the Fountek CD3.0, X2.0, and similar ribbons.

[5th element]

The only trouble with the RSS210 is its abominable sensitivity.

[Rick Craig]

The only trouble with the RSS210 is its abominable sensitivity.

That's why I suggested two in parallel.

[wolf_teeth]

The only trouble with the RSS210 is its abominable sensitivity.

Highly agreed. This is why I have a Crown Drivecore 1500 for my stereo mains. I make up for the sensitivity loss in power. The RSS210HF-4 has an F3/10 of 26/19 in a 1ft^3 ported box, it plays to over 800 Hz cleanly with its low Le- so there is absolutely nothing else wrong with it. Highly agreed again!

Later,
Wolf

[wolf_teeth]

That's why I suggested two in parallel.

Now that the 8 ohmers are out- sure! Nothing wrong with that.
Wolf

[5th element]

It's a shame that people don't make more higher sensitivity drivers, but then again, it's easy to see why not, when something like the RSS210 gives you such deep bass in such a small cabinet, albeit needing a ton of power to get there. Power these days is cheap and people like small boxes. I know I do.

[miyami]

Thanks for all the replies. This has been really helpful.
Unfortunately, I still haven't had the possibility to actually listen to either the Finalists, or a design with the SS 8857 or the NeoCD1.0.
So, I would like to repeat my question if there is anybody out there in Southern California, that has built such a speaker?

[miyami]

Rick,

Paul writes in his write-up for the cantilenas that the only "special" part of the cross-over is the 14ga Solen air-core inductor in the woofer circuit chosen for its low DCR. All other inductors are standard Madisound air cores, capacitors are Solen propylene, and resistors are Mills.
Is there any critical part that would be worth upgrading to higher quality (e.g. the tweeter and mid-range caps)?