I recently tested a LOT of tweeters to decide what I wanted to include in my speakers.
Beryllium is bright and metallic. Some brands do a better job of taming it than others but at a root level, I just couldn't love any of the ones I have heard. Tons of detail but at a very fatiguing price. I would rather listen to a silk dome personally unless paired with very warm electronics.
Diamond tweeters to me sound better but the only one I have heard that I really love is from Accuton and it is PRICEY! Marten's high end speakers are mind boggling in terms of soundstage but at $1500 each for just the tweeter, I found it difficult to include in my speakers. Lesser diamond tweeters lack the soundstage that beryllium delivers.
Accuton and Eton both offer ceramic domes though Eton is sandwiched with Magnesium. Much more reasonably priced and I feel they offer as much detail as a beryllium without the hard, metallic edge. Incidentally, I opted to use Eton tweeters in my speakers. |
@tomcy6 I have heard seven implementations of beryllium tweeters from four companies that are in VERY expensive speakers. I tried three different tweeters myself from different manufacturers. Unless paired with warm gear, I don’t like them.
Normal tube gear is not warm enough. Still hate them with an MC275 driving them or some VTLs. Personal taste but I find them unpleasant.
The exception was Magico in the S line. Their implementation is outstanding. I haven’t heard the M line but I am sure it is as good.
I agree that silk domes can be awful as well with crappy implementations. I like a slightly forward sound but have been hearing a lot of speakers that take it way too far lately. |
how do you define a "simple crossover"? I ask this as I have learned the term "simple" means different things to different people.
For instance, I have spoken extensively about how to optimize sound utilizing Eton drivers with the folks at Eton and they said their speakers sound best with "simple crossovers".
Digging deeper, what they mean by simple is 2nd order to 3rd order. But 4th order bricks of inductors and capacitors are unnecessary to get the most out of their drivers. They mean simple by professional standards.
Secondarily, what is "ceramic hell"? As someone who uses a ceramic tweeter in their speaker implementations (admittedly not pure ceramic, but a ceramic magnesium sandwich), I have no idea what you are talking about. I find the ceramic tweeter to be smooth, detailed and revealing without a smidge of harshness, edginess, etc... that would lead one to describe the speakers as hellish.
|
@tomcy6 - thank you for the civil response. Something that seems to be lacking these days.
If I get a chance to do some relaxed listening I will and I am looking forward to a day when I can spend some time with the M series from Magico.
What is fascinating and i learned this through some recent testing. I held everything constant except the cabinet material. In a cabinet that was less rigid, the same driver, tweeter crossover combo was dead and lacked detail.
The solution to this is to tweak the resistor and one of the capacitors in the crossover. This increases the output slightly offsetting the lack of damping and the net effect sounds very good but makes the tweeter bright. If the cabinet is very poorly damped you have to adjust a lot.
My hunch is is that the worst offenders (products will remain unnamed) have poorly damped cabinets and need to make bigger adjustment to their crossover which is why I hate them so much.
And why something like the Magico S line sounds so good because the cabinets are heavily damped and the crossover values are closer to optimal.
My hunch is, the Magico M line is going to be as close as a beryllium tweeter will get to absolute perfection. I am hoping someone at Capital Audiofest has them so I can hear them.
for a stand-mount mine are very good and for my taste, are 99% perfect. I am looking at two materials that will be significantly stiffer and potentially offer better damping compared to the Carbon Fiber sandwich panels I am using and I am looking at three tweeters that will crossover at a more optimal point.
One will I’ll be a ribbon, one will be diamond and one will be beryllium. That last 1% to perfection will come at a price though as I expect these standmount speakers to retail at $15k to $20K when done.
|
This has become a fascinating thread. I keep wanting to unfollow it but something has kept drawing me back and I think that the underlying argument is one of my biggest issues with the current state of audio.
We have a speaker (Paradigm) that has a bright character. The dealer, correctly states, that with careful system matching and room treatment, the speaker can be spectacular. I 100% agree with that.
I also find that problematic and my issues are not technical. My hunch is that not many consumers are walking into a store buying a speaker in that price range probably already have a system in place and the Paradigms will be replacing an existing speaker. Unless that consumer has just the right equipment, they are going to be extremely disappointed when they get that speaker home unless they are revamping their whole system. Reviewers do nothing to help this. Have you ever read a bad review? And, the brand fans advocate like hell for their brand in forums where you might get an honest opinion. Badging is an amazing phenomenon.
That being said, am sure audiotroy is highly consultative (you called me out for not being consultative in another thread which was fair) and would never sell these Paradigm speakers to a consumer with Bryston, Ayre, etc... gear and cheers to you for that. But this industry is not well known for consultative salespeople who are tolerant of other opinions and work to truly make customers happy.
The added issue is that speaker manufacturers and most (not all) retailers feed into this. Does everyone remember the Pepsi Challenge from the 80's? They would show coke drinkers take a side-by-side sip test of Pepsi and coke and 9 out of 10 times consumer would pick Pepsi as the product they like better. This was fact and Pepsi did not mis-represent the results in anyway. And ultimately is why Coke launched "New Coke".
The funny thing was, when consumers take a side-by-side sip of Pepsi vs. Coke, the slightly sweeter taste profile of Pepsi is far more appealing. When you test preferences over a long consumption session or with food, most consumers prefer the slightly less sweet taste of Coke as the sweeter flavor becomes less pleasant on the 5th, 8th, 10th sip.
Speakers manufacturers design products to deliver wow moments in brief listening sessions. When in practice, over an extended listening session, the speakers can be highly fatiguing unless carefully paired. And many retailers or manufacturers at shows demo products via "the Pepsi Challenge" method. They will have a very prescribed amp pairing and series of tracks that will show a product at its very best and deliver a brilliant soundstage and amazing details that will be jaw dropping.
Bluntly, this method sells speakers. But, this Pepsi challenge method of selling speakers leads to buyers remorse and ultimately forcing consumers to upgrade other elements of their system. It takes advantage of the psychology that the consumer couldn't have made a poor choice in their speakers selection. They have purchased this new brand that they identify with and therefore there has to be something wrong with the rest of there system since these sounded so good in the showroom. Badging is such a big part of hi-fi that it is easy to exploit this. Thus, the consumer upgrades to electronics that fit the speakers better. Bigger register ring for the retailer.
Irony is, the retailer wins, manufacturer wins and the consumer ultimately ends up with a system that makes them happy but at a significantly higher cost. Is that a win for the consumer? Is this sort of selling what is causing audio retailers to close at an astonishing pace? Could it explain why hi-fi is a relatively obscure hobby in the US? Is there a better way?
|
@Audiotroy I have no POV on swapping wires and the impact it can have on sound. My experience is largely with lower end cables in direct swaps with mid-fi systems. The exception is Kimber who I have partnered with. I use their wire inside my speakers and in my demo rooms and can only say that my systems have never sounded better. I have never done any formal testing with power cables. Though a person I have a lot of respect for reported some results of power cable testing and said the results were not subtle but that gauge was a bigger driver than manufacturer. Again, I have no formal POV.
Regarding speakers, am pairing is critical but some speakers are more sensitive to changes in amplifiers than others. There are some speakers that will expose tiny changes in amplification and it is rarely a good thing. It is usually when the speaker is so forward that it is brutally fatiguing.
I have a hypothesis on why. My feeling is, based on T/S parameters, there is an optimal crossover design for a speaker combination in a perfectly damped box. Reality deviates from that optimal scenario. The further you deviate, the more sensitive the speakers will become to small changes in amplification. That is a hypothesis that is unproven but supported by my empirical observations. I am looking forward to testing the theory through the years.
What I sometimes find is that a speaker that might not be as "exciting" and dynamic in a short test might prove to be the better choice long term because it will be less fatiguing. The goal is creating a speaker that is revealing and can deliver amazing detail without being forward. My hypothesis is the answer is in the cabinet and it's overall ability to dampen rather than the drivers themselves.
Additionally, there is an inherent "sonic character" to a speaker. You can change amps and make a speaker better but if you just don't like the fundamentals of what the speaker does, a swap in amplification may mitigate the issue to some extent but will likely never completely resolve someones underlying distaste.
I will offer an example from my own line when showing at AXPONA. Like my partner company Art Audio, we don't have a "house sound." The goal is to make the ultimate expression using specific component parts and let the sound fall where it may.
My Nightshade speaker is very soulful. Wonderful detail but decidedly colored. They make horns and female voices shine like the sun. My Blackthorn's are precise and analytic. Sound is intended to be very true. Through the three days at AXPONA, I had dozens of consumers in and we would make hot swaps between the speakers in the middle of songs so they could hear the difference.
No one thought the differences were subtle. As many people would say something along the lines of; I get the Blackthorn. It is "accurate" but it lacks the soul of the Nightshade and is a bit to "audiophile" for my taste. Others would say, I get the Nightshade. It is soulful and female voices sound great, but I love the Balckthorn because it delivers more of a pure, "Audiophile" sound.
In my opinion, no amp swap, no cable swap, no change in source is going to change the underlying character of those two speakers. They are very intentionally, radically different speakers. If you love one, you probably won't love the other.
That being said, at some point I really want to stop into your store. I live in CT and my manufacturing is in PA. I drive through NJ frequently. Next time I make that trip I think I will reach out and schedule an appointment to see you guys. |
Kosst - I did. That speaker is universally deemed bright and I found it and every other paradigm product I have ever heard to be bright. But, that has been there house sound since the beginning of time.
Off topic, but it is amazing how much warmer my old amplifiers sound vs. my newer gear. I have tube amps from three companies and all are more neutral / brighter than my old Carver SS gear or older Marantz, Pioneer and Kenwood receivers I have heard recently. Not sure if it is the age of equipment or if the definition of neutral has shifted through time. My Carver gear was just refurbished so I am less persuaded it is age.
Incidentally, my old Infinity Kappa 8.1s which had an electrostatic tweeter sounded great being driven by the Carver dear. Driven by a Rogue power amp, I think I would want to take an ice-pick to my ears they are so bright. Maybe speakers were generally brighter back then like the Infinity's.
Maybe the definition of neutral neutral hasn't shifted but the average amplifier was warmer and the average speaker brighter. Now we have more choice, better tweeters, etc... and now speakers and amps have both shifted to be more neutral.
I have not done extensive listening of vintage gear and I only really done serious, critical listening tests for past 10 years on gear so I am not claiming expertise in this space. Just idle speculation. |
never mind - found it "EMIT's are not ribbon speakers. They are planar magnetics. Planar magnetic speakers have a voice coil printed on or attached/glued to a diaphragm. With true ribbons the entire radiating surface is a conductor. The name EMIT means; electromagnetic induction tweeter." Thus EMIT-R would be Electromagnetic Induction Tweeter - Radial |
Sloppy on my part. You are right. The EMIT R is a ribbon super tweeter rather than an electrostat. |
I have seen the original EMIT described as a single ended ribbon and the EMIT-R as a radial ribbon or a "leaf tweeter" I have never heard of a "leaf tweeter" and can't say that I know what that is. People who have old stock refer to the EMIT-R as a radial ribbon.
If they aren't a ribbon, I would love to know what they actually are. Can you please explain? |
@bifwynne I never called Paradigm sonic swill. I have heard six or eight paradigm products since the mid 90s and they have had a consistent sound. Paradigm has some of the most loyal and enthusiastic fans of any brand. I feel like they have a consistent house sound and if you like it, you really like it. If you don’t, you usually really don’t. It’s not bad. It’s my opinion based on my observations.
I like Magico speakers and another poster in this thread I think said they are lifeless. It’s an opinion and worth roughly what we all paid for. Mine is worth just as much.
Incidentally, in another thread, I told another poster that I hated using the word bright. He suggested that “bright” was not a bad thing, just a descriptor. I took his advice here. Evidently, I was right.
|
