Driver Evaluations for a new project

[kevinp.]

Jed, I do not understand the combo of Scanspeak tweeter with the Thiel&Partner mid. I would rather see an metal cone tweeter. Also with these kind of drivers I expect a cabinet which has bigger round overs, you do not want to introduce edge distortions of the cabinet.

Eh, I think the DIY community has shown that you don't need to match a ceramic or any hard-coned mid with a metal cone tweeter. Look at Troel's Sp44- Accuton mid and Hiquphon tweeter. Rick Craig's designs with Accuton mids use ribbon tweeters. Heck, Zaph's ZDT3 with the Dayton aluminum mid and cloth Dayton tweeter. Even better the Modula NeoD, same setup.

[Jed]

I started a new thread on these topics... let's honor the OP.

Sorry Evil Twin..... please be merciful!

[kevinp.]

understood but my belief was that this is relevent information, as Evil Twin has not nailed down drivers yet and is testing ceramic mids and cloth domed tweeters, so I don't think it is prudent to automatically discard that combination as viable.

[dlneubec]

ET,

I mentioned the Peerless HDS tweeter early in this thread. I just thought you might be interested in the shallow DIY waveguide studies I did with it mounted with the faceplate removed. This was done for my BaSSlines project BaSSlines . I also posted a separate thread on the waveguide experiments and measurements here, which is much shorter :W
Peerless HDS shallow DIY waveguide testing

Perhaps a shallow DIY waveguide would be worth considering for whatever tweeter you end up with.

[Kevin Haskins]

Why not higher sensitivity drivers to match the mid? Or multiple bass drivers are least. Last time I reviewed all of the Scan Speak 8" drivers, they were all very low Qt and all very inefficient.

Out of respect to Evil Twin, back on topic, and I look forward to seeing your survey of bass drivers.

The efficiency of most 7"-8" midbass drivers is mainly determined by their intended bandwidth for a given box size. Hoffman's Iron Law bites you in the ass. If you start with a box size constraint, and a desired bandwidth, that fixes the efficiency for you. Efficiency is just BL/Mms so adding some to get the 1W/1M number up is as easy as decreasing the mass, or increasing the BL, both of which will change the lower-end bandwidth for a given box size.

The situation is even worse after BSC is applied. The situation yells for active design with the bottom-end run by a different amplifier but that has not been a popular choice in either DIY or commercial solutions. I'm not sure why because all the tools are out there and not really that expensive to implement.

[Bear]

The situation yells for active design with the bottom-end run by a different amplifier but that has not been a popular choice in either DIY or commercial solutions. I'm not sure why because all the tools are out there and not really that expensive to implement.

To an extent, stereo subwoofers are one way of starting down this path. If you have a good quality sub that can play into the 80Hz range without significant distortion (muddiness, boominess, HD, etc.), then your demands on a bass driver diminish significantly. Change the subwoofers out for bass bins, and the lower limit frequency goes up even more. One challenge in this is effective bass management in your pre/pro. Another is the differences in expectations that people have for a speaker, independent of its actual application (e.g., it should be a 20/20 speaker because that's what humans hear...). It's not a complete list of issues around this concept, but you (hopefully) get the idea.

Net effect: what are your design goals and how do you want to accomplish them? For this design, the emperor has entrusted our fearless and fear-inducing Dark Lord of the Sith with instructions that seem to include some genetic reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Rebel scums' I-wing bomber, but without some of its nastiest flaws (e.g., price, performance tradeoffs not consistent with MSRP).

Bill

[Evil Twin]

ET,

I mentioned the Peerless HDS tweeter early in this thread. I just thought you might be interested in the shallow DIY waveguide studies I did with it mounted with the faceplate removed. This was done for my BaSSlines project BaSSlines . I also posted a separate thread on the waveguide experiments and measurements here, which is much shorter :W
Peerless HDS shallow DIY waveguide testing

Perhaps a shallow DIY waveguide would be worth considering for whatever tweeter you end up with.

We have not been examining any waveguide solutions for this project to date, whether DIY or commerical, because of the fixed and specific targets for the design.

Using a baffle size which decreases in width with the increasing frequency of the driver is done in this configuration in order to encourage the wides possible dispersion and off axis room power response- this is somewhat antithetical to a classic waveguide, which seeks to provide a very controlled directivity with uniform frequency response off axis, with only level drop off.

This is an example of a past study for use of waveguide:



This is a true waveguide, with very similar response curves regardless of axis, except at the highest frequencies- pattern control is maintained effectively to about 1400-1500 Hz.

The MCM waveguide unfortunately loses pattern control around 3.3-3.5 kHz, so should be used with care, if that is the intention.

The Seas DXT tweeter performs effectively from 3-4 kHz up for a very shallow waveguide,


but the effective usable sensitivity is only about 87 dB after the necessary frequency response shaping, marginally low for some system configurations. And the fall-off overall at 60 degrees is substantial- while limiting the midrange or midwoofers to similar level would be difficult or impossible.

Bear's post is exactly on the mark:

Net effect: what are your design goals and how do you want to accomplish them? For this design, the emperor has entrusted our fearless and fear-inducing Dark Lord of the Sith with instructions that seem to include some genetic reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Rebel scums' I-wing bomber, but without some of its nastiest flaws (e.g., price, performance tradeoffs not consistent with MSRP).

Any deviation from this goal will incur the Emperor's wrath- and he is not as forgiving as I am.

[chrismercurio]

The efficiency of most 7"-8" midbass drivers is mainly determined by their intended bandwidth for a given box size. Hoffman's Iron Law bites you in the ass. If you start with a box size constraint, and a desired bandwidth, that fixes the efficiency for you. Efficiency is just BL/Mms so adding some to get the 1W/1M number up is as easy as decreasing the mass, or increasing the BL, both of which will change the lower-end bandwidth for a given box size.

The situation is even worse after BSC is applied. The situation yells for active design with the bottom-end run by a different amplifier but that has not been a popular choice in either DIY or commercial solutions. I'm not sure why because all the tools are out there and not really that expensive to implement.

The situation yells for BOSE. Kidding!

Or at least why sub sat systems aren't a bad idea. I ran into this problem with my current project and finally decided to go with a higher F3 than originally thought appropriate because efficiency, extension, and SIZE is a tough thing to balance. In my wife's house it goes size, efficiency, and extension. Oh, it's my house too.

Hoffman...

[JonMarsh]

Not to be confused with Dustin....

[Dave Bullet]

In my wife's house it goes size, efficiency, and extension. Oh, it's my house too.

Not to be taken out of context either :rofl:

[Evil Twin]

An auspicious day- the Uighuyr Prison Service transport arrived, delivering some captured Danish rebels from the Bear Nebula. It shall be very interesting to perform a through interrogation of these suspects in the coming days...

[augerpro]

What is the mid size the Emperor is looking at? Candidates so far have been all over the map...I wonder if the Seas W12CY-001 might work a bit better than the larger W15 in this design? Better off axis dispersion up high, and the higher cone breakup may allow a higher crossover point? Cheaper than the competing Accutons, although I'm not sure how cost/value is being weighed in this design.

[Bear]

An auspicious day- the Uighuyr Prison Service transport arrived, delivering some captured Danish rebels from the Bear Nebula. It shall be very interesting to perform a through interrogation of these suspects in the coming days...

Oh, mighty Lord of the Sith, it warms my unworthy heart to hear that the rebel scum are now entered into your personal care. I eagerly await the results of your breaking them and seeing if they will be able to adequately serve our Emperor.

It has occurred to this humble servant that certain super-agents of the Emperor, the so-called Accuton C173-T6-95, code-named "C95", have not been seen or heard of since Operation Isiris. I am curious about the Dark Lord's perspective on these as low-end anchors for this operation vs. the normally somewhat unruly Wookiees submitted from our humble backwater.

[Evil Twin]

What is the mid size the Emperor is looking at? Candidates so far have been all over the map...I wonder if the Seas W12CY-001 might work a bit better than the larger W15 in this design? Better off axis dispersion up high, and the higher cone breakup may allow a higher crossover point? Cheaper than the competing Accutons, although I'm not sure how cost/value is being weighed in this design.

The W12 has a more extended high frequency performance than the W15- but not so extended as the RS100-4. And it's breakup mode is far worse- so it does not fare well just on performance considerations for the low cost design. Resonance amplification complicates the distortion behavior of both the W15 and W12, suggesting limiting the upper crossover to 2 kHz to avoid a hardening in the sound from rising 3rd order distortion.

Regrettably, voltage sensitivity of the W12 and W15 may not be adequate for the needs of this project- as you know, the Emperor is not nearly so forgiving of minor shortcomings as I may be from time to time.

The C79 is emerging as the the likely best high performance choice for this system, as it's 90 dB sensitivity leaves the designer some flexibility, the distortion is generally low over a wide frequency range, and off axis behavior is consistent enough to support a 2.5 to 3 kHz crossover frequency if needed.

The low cost version of the system is still somewhat up in the air, but results to date make a good case for the RS100-4, based on smoothness of frequency response, low distortion, voltage sensitivity, and remarkably low price. Because of it's physical design it requires considerable care in construction of the mounting baffle. But we do have a plan....

A close runner up would be the W4-1337s; had it a db or two more sensitivity, and a bit lower distortion in the range from 300 to 1500 Hz, it could be a preferred choice.

[Evil Twin]

Oh, mighty Lord of the Sith, it warms my unworthy heart to hear that the rebel scum are now entered into your personal care. I eagerly await the results of your breaking them and seeing if they will be able to adequately serve our Emperor.

It has occurred to this humble servant that certain super-agents of the Emperor, the so-called Accuton C173-T6-95, code-named "C95", have not been seen or heard of since Operation Isiris. I am curious about the Dark Lord's perspective on these as low-end anchors for this operation vs. the normally somewhat unruly Wookiees submitted from our humble backwater.

Actually, the super agents in the facility are the C173N-T6-90, which is a Sith Lord candidate, rather than the C173-T6-95, which might be considered only a Sith Knight or Sith Master.

The 173N uses the underhung voice coil with a massive neodymium magnet, achieving about 93 dB sensitivity. There is a new variant of this available, the C173N-T6-96; this has a lower mass cone, modified magnetic and VC parameters, and is focused on extending the high frequency performance, though with this radiator diameter, there is little to be done about improving off axis behavior.



The dynamic parameters overall of these two midrange drivers exceeds the parameters for the current project total system design, and so will be reserved for the next project evolution, probably the Isiris M. (as in "monopole").


By the way, we have obtained new gold press interface neural interfaces for interrogating the Danish rebels, and can assure there will be no possibility of rights organizations finding any permanent marks to indicate these prisoners have ever been out of their packing cells.

[Dennis H]

Jon, how does the C79 look for dipole use? It's kinda hard to tell from the picture how open the back is.

[JonMarsh]

The C79 is not very open- it is built similar to a C89, but with a shorter VC stack, and the rear plate that the magnet is mounted on is quite close to the front plate- even for a conventional monopole it will take substantial relief on the rear- on a 1" thick front panel, it's best to chamfer at least 1/2" of that depth- pictures will be posted later on to illustrate. I'd be inclined to suggest that it doesn't have the Sd or the Xmax to be a good choice for a dipole midrange, unless the low frequency point is more restricted. The C89 is better, due to higher Xmax. But I'd imagine a good 6-1/2" to 7" driver might be a better choice- like a Seas ER18RNX, for example, which pretty well behaved up to 2500 Hz or so, other than somewhat rising distortion.

[---k---]

[snip]The C79 is emerging as the the likely best high performance choice for this system, as it's 90 dB sensitivity leaves the designer some flexibility, the distortion is generally low over a wide frequency range, and off axis behavior is consistent enough to support a 2.5 to 3 kHz crossover frequency if needed.

The low cost version of the system is still somewhat up in the air, but results to date make a good case for the RS100-4, based on smoothness of frequency response, low distortion, voltage sensitivity, and remarkably low price. Because of it's physical design it requires considerable care in construction of the mounting baffle. But we do have a plan....

A close runner up would be the W4-1337s; had it a db or two more sensitivity, and a bit lower distortion in the range from 300 to 1500 Hz, it could be a preferred choice.

Recently around the net, there seems to be an increased interest in high sensitive drivers. Several of people are experimenting with pro drivers, to achieve a high sensitive design. I think the appeal of a high sensitive design is the thought that these have a lot of reserve, and more dynamics.

I'm not sure if I buy into this thinking. I tend to believe that low sensitive speakers can be dynamic with the right amp.

Can you share your interest in higher sensitive drivers? I suspect it is so that it matches up better with the tweeter and woofer, and therefore requires less padding.

[Jed]

Just by a 1000 watt amp and you don't have to worry about sensitive speakers. :-)

[Evil Twin]

Recently around the net, there seems to be an increased interest in high sensitive drivers. Several of people are experimenting with pro drivers, to achieve a high sensitive design. I think the appeal of a high sensitive design is the thought that these have a lot of reserve, and more dynamics.

I'm not sure if I buy into this thinking. I tend to believe that low sensitive speakers can be dynamic with the right amp.

Can you share your interest in higher sensitive drivers? I suspect it is so that it matches up better with the tweeter and woofer, and therefore requires less padding.

The correct phrase would be "adequate voltage sensitivity" in this case.

Consider that the proposed target is a dual midwoofer design, and the nominal sensitivity for the midwoofers being evaluated is 87-88.5 dB. With paralleling two, this increases to 93 to 94.5. The baffle step compensation for a free standing speaker reduces this 4-5 dB at least, perhaps a full 6 dB.

At this point, depending on voicing, the midrange sensitivty, not considering crossover insertion losses, should be in the range of 86-87 dB. Many of the small cone drivers at 84-85 dB fall just shy of what is needed. With a midrange sensitivity of 89 - 90 db, there is some working room available, including if needed partial BSC.

I don't think this line of reasoning is outside of the "mainstream", and it certainly isn't what I see in so called high efficiency systems where enthusiasts are targeting horns and pro type cone drivers, or very light cone drivers with low Xmax. Considering Hoffman's Iron law, there is a diminishing point of return- one can pursue more efficiency, but then you give up things like bass extension or reasonable enclosure size, and in many cases, adequate self damping in cone materials.

I am not of the school of thinking that starts with Seas Excel woofers and W series midrange, (consider the Joseph Audio RM33si) and winds up by the time BSC is applied and crossover insertion losses with a system sensitivity of barely 80 dB. But in this case, achieving a target sensitivity close to 88 dB/2.83 VRMS would be quite acceptable. This would support very adequate playback levels with a 60-120W/ch amplifier.

[HYPERTUNE]

Have you considered the Illuminator 12M?

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=148&products_id=8574

Seems to meet all the requirements you have set for the midrange driver.

[Evil Twin]

The physical design is very interesting- I believe another experimenter likened it to "pure speaker porn". That same experimenter, testing other cone midwoofers in the illuminator series, found significantly poorer distortion behavior than the previous revelators. Considering that, the rising high frequency response requiring additional effort to tame, and the somewhat limited funds in the Imperial treasury for new drivers, taking a pass at this point seems wise, unless you would like to purchase a pair out of curiosity and send them in for testing. We'll even pay return shipping.

[Evil Twin]

Oh, mighty Lord of the Sith, it warms my unworthy heart to hear that the rebel scum are now entered into your personal care. I eagerly await the results of your breaking them and seeing if they will be able to adequately serve our Emperor.

Initial interrogations are complete, but follow up examinations may be necessary- we are still processing raw neural data and cross correlating results. The 3004/6600-00 data has been appended to the tweeter tests.

[Dennis H]

The C79 is not very open- it is built similar to a C89, but with a shorter VC stack, and the rear plate that the magnet is mounted on is quite close to the front plate- even for a conventional monopole it will take substantial relief on the rear- on a 1" thick front panel, it's best to chamfer at least 1/2" of that depth- pictures will be posted later on to illustrate. I'd be inclined to suggest that it doesn't have the Sd or the Xmax to be a good choice for a dipole midrange, unless the low frequency point is more restricted. The C89 is better, due to higher Xmax. But I'd imagine a good 6-1/2" to 7" driver might be a better choice- like a Seas ER18RNX, for example, which pretty well behaved up to 2500 Hz or so, other than somewhat rising distortion.

Thanks Jon. The appeal of small dipole mids is Rudolf's recent studies/measurements into dipole polar response. You need to keep the baffle width under a wavelength to avoid having some frequencies be louder off axis than they are on axis. So, just for fun, say you started with a B&G Neo3, with the back removed, as your dipole tweeter. It could maybe play down to 2.5K which means the mid baffle shouldn't be a whole lot wider than 5" for a 2.5K XO. A 15" midwoofer (say a TD15M) on a 16" baffle could play as high as 800 Hz without getting into trouble with the polar response. Or maybe 500 Hz if you added some small wings. Of course, the TD15M would need some help from a sub to have a real full-range system.

Just thinking out loud.

[JonMarsh]

Interesting thoughts, Dennis- thanks for sharing! I've been mulling some similar things and making notes- could be the Arvo Part will live again some day, in a somewhat different form- I'm thinking Ciare 18" woofer, just because I have some to play with-but your suggestion of the TD15M makes a lot of sense- and pondering what might mate up with it on what size baffle- I think the Neo3 is a good idea for the top.

But I must not get distracted- one project at a time!

[Jed]

That same experimenter, testing other cone midwoofers in the illuminator series, found significantly poorer distortion behavior than the previous revelators. .

That's an exaggeration ET. He found them "almost" as good in HD but the greater cost lowered the value proposition. I'm sure the Illuminator mids/woofers are excellent.

As for the 4" Illuminator. That one is very interesting and the rising top end should be no problem at all to shape into a flat response and allows a variety of transfer functions.

[Bear]

Initial interrogations are complete, but follow up examinations may be necessary- we are still processing raw neural data and cross correlating results. The 3004/6600-00 data has been appended to the tweeter tests.

If my unworthy self may be so bold as to interpret the Dark Lord's transmissions, it seems that the FR plots show a close kinship between the "Air Circ" and the Illuminator, but the distortion plots seem to show a touch better performance in the lower-end model's F2, but slightly worse in F3?

[Evil Twin]

You are strong in the Force, young Padawan...

The high levels of HD2 in both trouble me somewhat, but then considering Mark K's test results with more exotic procedures, they still are a reference standard. Above 2-3 kHz, they are in a very unique class...

The C13N remains to be re-tested; even a waveguide mounted version is available in the laboratory, but the press of mundane activities limits the rate of progress possible in this research- still, a steady progress is being made.

Initial results on the other pair of suspects show SPL response in line with published material; midrange distortion is low and trends steadily lower with increasing frequency, but the performance crown below 500 Hz may be held by another, and not the one expected- re-tests may be in order to confirm this information. The SS has the edge in 3rd harmonic above 400 Hz, but not in 2nd harmonic- and the driver in the lead has very similar levels for both 2nd and 3rd at any frequency below 1 kHz.

Additional samples should be tested and retested to confirm this data.

Until then, the posting of midwoofer results may be held in abeyance.

[Dennis H]

Bear, you have the best sig ever! Whoda thunk the same actor could play both parts. :T

[---k---]

ET, that explanation of your desired voltage sensitivity was excellent. Thanks.

[cjd]

2 4ohm RS100's in parallel though?!

Ryan, you have to remember that all your speakers ARE pretty high up there on voltage sensitivity. Not your grandma's speakers...

[Jonasz]

Just by a 1000 watt amp and you don't have to worry about sensitive speakers. :-)

Wouldn't that lead to thermal/powercompression?

[Jed]

Wouldn't that lead to thermal/powercompression?

It would depend on the drivers' ability to dissipate heat- but yeah I see your point.

[---k---]

Ryan, you have to remember that all your speakers ARE pretty high up there on voltage sensitivity. Not your grandma's speakers...

Yeah I know, mine are above average. You've spoiled me! I did have in my response at one point that your designs for me have resulted in above average sensitivity, but edited it out for the sake of brevity. (Though the In-Khans are a different story!)

ET pretty much detailed detailed what I've gathered from you. I just was making sure there wasn't something more to it. I've seen so many recent posts about the magic of a 96db pro woofer.

[Saurav]

Reading this discussion, a couple of experiences come to mind.

One was my first time listening to a pair of Avalon Eidolons (I think with the diamond tweeters) at CES a few years back. I remember listening to the sound of a cymbal changing as it decayed, and thinking "Hey, I've heard cymbals do that in real life, but never heard it on a stereo before".

Another was when listening to this really large pair of horn speakers at another audio show. Again, cymbals, and this system really conveyed the fact that cymbals don't just go psssh, there's a guy sitting there hitting them really hard with a stick. Again, brought back memories of how a real drum kit sounds, and never heard a stereo do that before.

IME... (and I'm painting with a very broad brush here), I've found speakers with hi-eff drivers to generally have better dynamics. At my very layman level of understanding, I don't think the amps are a problem, it's easy to get high power amps with good sonics and low distortion. I think it's harder to make a lower efficiency driver soak up all that extra power and still maintain its performance characteristics (don't increase distortion, stay linear, etc.). Whereas with a higher efficiency driver, it's well within it's 'comfort zone' reproducing those peaks. Play the two at the same (high) SPL level, and one of the drivers is stressing more, and you can hear it.

[Evil Twin]

Generalizations, generalizations. I've heard very colored high efficiency drivers, and I've heard a few good ones. I've heard many colored and nonlinear low efficiency drivers, and I've heard a few good ones. For solid dynamics and realistic timbre, some might argue that performance starts in the driver class somewhere around the performance level of a Seas Millenium Excel tweeter. But the effects in reproduction which you describe are very dependent on other elements in the chain, too- including your program source device, the recording, and the electronics. There are many opportunities to throw away quality at every step of the stage.

[Evil Twin]

That's an exaggeration ET. He found them "almost" as good in HD but the greater cost lowered the value proposition. I'm sure the Illuminator mids/woofers are excellent.

As for the 4" Illuminator. That one is very interesting and the rising top end should be no problem at all to shape into a flat response and allows a variety of transfer functions.

Well, Jed, everyone is entitled to their interpretation of the results. If on average 10 dB higher 3rd order harmonic distortion at nearly 50% higher price is "almost as good", then should I look forward to your next design using the illuminator woofers on the bottom end, and the 12MU/4731T for the midrange?

The Emperor is not nearly so forgiving of such shortfalls as you seem to be. Barring the possibility of someone else purchasing these and submitting them for testing, I doubt that I'll have the opportunity to look at them. I'm not inclined to request authorization of the Imperial treasury for such an acquisition- Especially not since a set of 8531G's received for evaluation do not appear initially to be performing up to reputation. While consistency may be considered the hobgoblin of a petty mind, it's also something we prefer and expect in drivers- perhaps unrealistically so. This bears further investigation and repeats of testing. Driver test otherwise has been quite repeatable and consistent to date.

[augerpro]

My lord there seems to be some new students of the Darkside in the universe: http://zaphaudio.com/blog.html Looks like the new Vifa and Scan-something or other. Scanspeak refugee designers from the Outer Rim I believe. Looks like soft cones, which is great, but I sure would like to see them step up to some high tech metal cones too.

[Evil Twin]

Yes, Brandon, our informants have brought other pictures of these new creations- I sense an effort to create a disturbance in the pecking order of design in the North Countries of Europe.

It will be interesting to see if the results better justify the aerodynamic efforts. Certainly this direction and that followed by ScanSpeak could be hoped to offer some benefits from improvements in reduction of rear wave masking- but if this creates other compromises in the motor design of the driver, is it the right direction? I need only point out the performance differences between the C89 and C79 Accuton's as an example.

[Saurav]

Generalizations, generalizations.

Agreed I was going to add that dollar for dollar, you'd probably give up clarity and resolution as you moved towards hi-eff / pro style drivers. This is probably more true in the lower price ranges.

For solid dynamics and realistic timbre

I picked two extremes to highlight that difference - one which got the timbre right like nothing I'd heard before, and the other that got the dynamics right.

Again, painting with a very broad brush, and not including the really good / expensive drivers, I think that's one of the things you trade off between your average hi-fi driver vs. your average pro driver - being good at timbre vs. being good at dynamics.

And like you said, it takes a really good driver to get them both right, and once you're in that range the differences are probably small.

All of that is couched in "In my limited experience", of course.

[Evil Twin]

You are doing the right thing by getting out and listening to as many possible systems and configurations- as well as to live music- that is, live and largely unamplified. Sometimes the extravagantly expensive systems will only disappoint extravagantly, such as the Marten Coltrane Supreme I heard a couple of years ago, but now and then a new experience will point you in interesting directions.

[Jed]

The Emperor is not nearly so forgiving of such shortfalls as you seem to be. .

And when does the Emperor depend on someone else's tests for his sacrament of truth?

I merely was correcting your inference that John Krutke implied his results of the Illuminator were significantly poorer than the Revalator when such words were never stated in his website. You never said in your post that the results were your take on it. Sorry I misinterpreted your analysis as someone else's. In that case, yes it is more expensive and the 3rd order is 5-10db worse but there are other characteristics that these drivers have which are unique and worth exploring to determine their ultimate performance.

I have no plans to use the Illuminators at this point, but good guess.

[Jed]

You are doing the right thing by getting out and listening to as many possible systems and configurations- as well as to live music- that is, live and largely unamplified. Sometimes the extravagantly expensive systems will only disappoint extravagantly, such as the Marten Coltrane Supreme I heard a couple of years ago, but now and then a new experience will point you in interesting directions.

I heard that system as well and it was really lacking in pretty much every area. Maybe a poorly set-up turntable? But geeze how much do those cost? 100K or more?

[Evil Twin]

At that time the quoted tariff was rather a bit higher- $250K, at the height of the value of the Euro. Staggering, isn't it? They also have the black diamond midrange, a diamond equivalent driver to the C44.

In all my years with turntables, I cannot conceive of how one could be setup so poorly as to produce the mediocrity and sonic mush that system produced in that room. The contrast with the performance rendered by the Avalon Isis in 2006 was staggering.

Someone didn't know what they were doing. Perhaps they were relatives or associates of Captain Needa.

[pedroskova]

This is kinda OT, but at the same time, since efficiency has been bandied about...

I just watched my ~15 watt PP 6V6 amp clip during the finale to "Pictures at an Exhibition". Well, "Duh", you might say. But the thing is - it's in an active system, and is high passed, 6th order, @ 500Hz - and it clipped on the striking of a bell @ ~5k (hand waving)... and the driver is rated at 96 dB/w/m.

By clipping, I mean that the 50 led's used to bias the OP tubes in that channel more than doubled their light output - only on the striking of the bell, and only in that channel.

So, hand waving again, let's say I needed 25 wpc for that bell driving a neo8 pdr - - when talking about drivers in the range of ~87 dB/w/m, we're looking at ~ 200wpc to handle said bell...according to my virtual wine-drenched napkin.

Watts are cheap, but tubes ain't.