Hi guys, today's technology has brought us a new type of tweeter made of diamond or beryllium. Do you know what are the strengths and weaknesses of diamond vs beryllium? Which one is the more expensive? Has today's dome tweeter better resolving power than the venerable electrostat? Jim Thiel once said that dynamic designs will be getting better all the time and will probably surpass electrostatic designs.
Hey Kosst_amojan the more a speaker disperses the worse it's image is going to be in any typical room. In open air they will image fine. I think your imagination may have the best of you. The membrane of an ESL represents a segment of the sound wave of a performance at a distance and it hearkens back to the stage in a way no other speaker can because it represents a segment of that sphere perfectly as there is no crossover. The ESL mimics the performance while the point source tries to mimic the performers resulting in a miniature sound stage and contracted depth as well as much more distortion and much poorer phase characteristics due to the crossovers and the nature of the drivers. ESLs can actually produce fabulous bass but you have to put them in an infinite baffle to make them work well which is totally and completely impractical for any remotely reasonable person so, the compromise is the subwoofer. Because I am sure your hearing is just fine I know for an absolute fact that you have not heard an appropriately set up ESL infinite Line source system and they are not easy to find. Should you ever be in the Boston area I would be more than happy to demonstrate. Now for those of you that want the ultimate point source speaker that will go loud enough to bust your eardrums you get four Accuton C168-6-490 midrange drivers and two C30-6-024 tweeters for a total price of $5000.00 Make a 2" thick plate 10" X 20" out of MDF and mount the midrange drivers on either side of the tweeter and as tight as you can to the tweeter. Make a simple 6 dB/Oct crossover at 3000 Hz. Cross to two subs at 125 Hz 24 dB/Oct. Lacquer plates to taste. I like Rasta. Don't forget to bull nose the edges. You might have to pad the MRs just a little. Hang the speakers from chains 1' in front of your wall right over the subs. The sensitivity will be about 93 dB 1 watt at 1 meter and the speaker should do 120 dB on just 100 watts! I would put acoustic foam behind the speakers. You would have to spend at least $30,000 on pre-assembled speakers to match these, maybe even more....much more. Life in the fast lane.
I’ve heard enough ESLs and big membrane speakers to know what they sound like, and they all basically sound the same. They present a massive wall of hyper-detailed sound with no sense of space
So full of it, you have no idea, you just described horns.
Over many years of audio, ESL’s have given me the best imaging in both side to side, outside the speakers, and in depth perception. No dynamic I have heard even Wilson Alexia MkII has ever equaled them.
But they wouldn't hold up too long being fed a steady diet of, Daft Punk, Tool, and DCD
As for your band/music taste, it explains now so much why you are the way you are.
smodtactical, 3.7s are the cherry in the line cost considered and you will usually be able to hear them at a dealer. Carbon, beryllium, diamond, silk, paper mache, whoopee. Power handling is the big issue for domes. But you are still left with a point source radiator. Using them in multiples has never worked well and probably never will. So, if all you are looking for is a midget sound stage they can be wonderful and I am not so sure the material makes an overwhelming difference. It is more important to find a speaker you like the sound of and will support the volume levels you aspire too and the best Tweeters will do this.
The esteemed moderators have wisely deleted the insulting, mocking, and arrogant post directed at me above by kosst
That’s typical as when he’s on it he has no idea, is obnoxious, and full of it in more ways than one. The only cure is to put an AVO out on him
I love Maggies but they can not hold a candle to a big ESL.
Totally agree, and neither can any dynamic tweeter I’ve heard, the top Raven ribbon comes close, and the way out in front of all is a Plasma, preferably without horn loading.
Let's do this, Mr. Brilliance: Leave me alone. Always. Stay out of my face and just ignore me stop at once your threats, insults, and mockery. You're arrogance and pomposity speak for themselves clearly.
The esteemed moderators have wisely deleted the insulting, mocking, and arrogant post directed at me above by kosst so I have accordingly deleted my thoughtful repsonse to this person.
kosst_amojan"Big panels are some of the most unnatural speakers I've ever heard. They sound interesting, no doubt, but almost no natural sound source is a gigantic flat membrane."
This reflects, indicates, and displays a profound, substantial, and significant misunderstanding, confusion, and/or ignorance/unfamiliarity with the design, substance, and nature of speakers intended for Music Reproduction Systems. For one thing no instrument in an orchestra, band, or ensemble resembles a cone speaker yet that would be your alternative to a panel speaker also depending on the design, construction, and technology employed in the panel speaker there may be substantial benefits and advantages in terms of crossover design and implementation that can easily render the panel speaker to be the objectively and measureably superior speaker but of course if you're experience is limited to just a few designs you may suffer from the type of misconception and misunderstanding as stated hear.
I have no experience with diamond tweeters, however I recently picked up a pair of second hand
Focal Electra 1008 BE speakers and am using them in a near field setup in my computer room, driven by my Audio Research VSI 55 integrated and they sound fantastic. I don't care for "bright" speakers and the Focals are not to my ears. They are very detailed, but the top end doesn't call undue attention to itself. I don't play them super loud, but have tried them out in my main system and in many ways they bested my Legacy Audio Focus 20/20's, but they are too small for that large of a room.
There are some "reviews" (sales pitches) on Upscale Audio's youtube channel on a couple of the Focal speakers that use the BE tweeters. You might get more technical info from those.
The N28-BER by Transducer Labs that Fritz uses in his Carrera speaker is the only one I've heard that I think I could live with. BTW, TL describes this on their website as pure beryllium.
georgehifi, it is not a matter of opinion. That ESLs are better is a matter of fact for the reasons I stated above. I love Maggies but they can not hold a candle to a big ESL.
Oh kosst-amojan, there is no question that ribbons disperse better than many if not most ESLs. But if the ESL is designed correctly this is not a problem. Everywhere else there is no comparison first because there is no crossover. Second, the diaphragm has less than a 10th of the mass. Third, the diaphragm of an ESL has uniform drive right down to the molecular level and is push pull throughout. If you were to sit down in front of Soundlabs Majestic 845s driven by say Atma-Sphere MA-2s even without subs you would be dumbfounded. Your response would be, "How can a speaker do that!" You would probably even wet your pants or diaper or whatever.
" I was more referring to Yamaha anyway, many models 1000 1000m 1000x 2000 2000x were a hoax saying they were Beryllium, when they were just vapour deposited coatings over plastic domes."
I stand corrected on the Focal ones. http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg311.pdf " repeated exposure to beryllium and beryllium compounds may cause cancer. This has not been proven to occur in humans, but employers are required to handle beryllium and its compounds as if they can cause cancer."
As for Diamond tweeters I can’t believe they are pure and not vapourized over some former..
@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.
Oh, and georgehifi it is the mass of air moved per unit weight.
I'm not talking about the mass of air moved, which is also needed to give bass air pressure into a room which ESL's don't do well and why a dynamic bass driver is better down low. I'm talking about the mass of "the diaphragm" being moved back and forward to "accurately follow" high frequencies at 5 to 20 thousand!!! times per second. Like I said it's all about "diaphragm mass" at these frequencies, and that's why Plasma's rule, because the flame has no mass.
Oh, and georgehifi it is the mass of air moved per unit weight. Since ESLs have such a large surface area the mass of air moved is quite high even when compared to ribbon tweeters and the mylar diaphragm weights much less than a comparably sized sheet of aluminum. The issue with ESLs has always been beaming. Unless you sit right in front of the diaphragm you hear no high end at all. ML deals with this by curving the diaphragm which greatly limits the low frequency capability of the panel. Sanders just makes a wider panel and says to sit right in line with the speakers and you shouldn't be listening any where else anyway. I am not kidding. Check out his web site. Acoustat made narrower panels and angled them. My 2+2s are two panels wide and only disperse 20 degrees at best so in reality you have to sit in line with them. They did make 3+3s and 4+4s which were really huge. Soundlabs uses a facet system that covers 45 degrees so you will have even treble over the size of a 3 person sofa. This is probably the best solution but it still results in a very large speaker. There have been attempts to electrically decrease the size or width of the tweeter area like Quad and Acoustat eventually played with but this causes other problems which I think interfere with the magical quality ESLs can have. No speaker can do the 1 way thing as well as a large ESL. Cross overs are a pain.
I am not sure what those are but they are not plasma speakers. To create a plasma you need some serious heat which requires serious power and an inert gas. Those things would melt.
They are interesting to say the least. I was in on the ground floor with Hill Plasmatronics helium tanks and all. I am not sure what those are but they are not plasma speakers. To create a plasma you need some serious heat which requires serious power and an inert gas. Those things would melt. Aside from that they are not line sources so they will not radiate in a way to match a line source. Maybe they will work well with a point source but you would have to get them close to the midrange driver which would make them impractical to use with most point source speakers.
Today's dome tweeters are way superior to what we had 20 years ago primarily because their power handling has improved to the degree that you can get to 100+ dB without blowing them. For a point source system a single tweeter is optimal. Arrays with dome tweeters just do not work well primarily because you can not get good ones close enough to form a smooth linear array. To do this at 20 KHz the edge of the domes has to be closer than 15 mm. Not easy which is why ribbons make far better linear arrays. Will they ever be as good as an electrostatic speaker? If you prefer point source speakers sure. If not then never. ESLs are better than ribbons because their acoustic impedance more closely matches that of air and you can ditch the crossovers. The downside is that you wind up with a very large loudspeaker.
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.
smodtactical141 posts07-15-2019 12:58am@ctsooner those carbon tweeters on the Vandys look extremely appealing. You make it sound like they have the detail of a magico but the ease of a Wilson ?
To my ears, as well as many I know, the Vandersteen’s put you a third of the way back in Orchestra in the middle seat. They are also near or full range (depending on your model).
Not trying to turn this into a commercial though.
I searched to find out if some tweeters are 100% Be with no substrate, but the best I found was ’Be Foil’. Either way, you are trying to get pure piston movement of all speakers (dynamic).
Show the links then seeing your soooo animated about it. I was more referring to Yamaha anyway, many models 1000 1000m 1000x 2000 2000x were a hoax saying they were Beryllium, when they were just vapour deposited coatings over plastic domes.
@ctsooner those carbon tweeters on the Vandys look extremely appealing. You make it sound like they have the detail of a magico but the ease of a Wilson ?
I don’t want to burst everyone’s Beryllium/Diamond bubble These are just "dust coatings" adhered over the top of main diaphragm (usually polyprop) to aid in stiffening, trouble is they add mass to it also. I found this out when I saw a scratch on the Beryllium and saw milky clear plastic underneath on a pair of Yamaha 1000X
The only one I know of that used pure Beryillium forged/spun cones was one Yamaha speaker, the impossible to find http://www.thevintageknob.org/yamaha-GF-1.html All the other Yamaha’s were Beryllium deposited on polypropylene diaphragms.
Smod, if you read this thread fully, we are taking bout a few other materials. I have personally enjoyed the Vandersteen Quatro CT's for awhile now. As we have mentioned, it's all about implementation. A great designer can get any of these to sound decent, but for me, nothing has beaten the Vandersteen Carbon drivers yet. I love Tidal, Rockport and many others, so it's not me just being a fan boy. I'm not a Wilson or Magico or B&W fan. It's often the way they voice them. Too forward or too laid back are sounds I can't fall for. This is just me and what I love. I need micro and macro detail. It's where the emotion is. Too many speakers are fast and revealing, but can be fatiguing if not don't correctly.
All designers have to make compromises, regardless of cost. That goes for the half million dollar speakers that are out there. Too many get wrapped up in 'what is the best material etc..', but there isn't any. It's what certain designers have chosen to achieve what they want. We all have favorite designers who's products we usually love.
I love the Be drivers in the Paradigm sig s8 v2 but I kind of want to move away from it since I worry if it blows 1 day the Be will become a dust in the air.
My brothers now retired Bozak B313's had dual paper tweeters strapped over the 12" woofers...they were sweet and sexy and full of realistic treble. Application and execution matter more, plus they had massive magnet structures behind them. The crossover was all discrete components and weighed about 15lbs.
I so enjoy "the older material" Skaaning midrange drivers used in my loudspeakers. I suspect (with tongue firmly in cheek) the implementation must overcome their polypropylene pedigree.
Keeping to topic, my loudspeakers implement Accuton diamond tweeters (BD30). Years back I owned loudspeakers using the Accuton BD20. To me, the Accuton diamond membrane sonic character doesn't stand out in the sense of immediately calling attention to itself in a "oh, wow!" kind of way. Given the cost, my initial expectation was that it would. It's positive attributes are, really, quite subtle. It is as if the treble content of music simply flows. Complex treble content from multiple instruments retains the separateness of the individual instruments to an extent I've not heard with ceramic, ribbon, or soft dome tweeters. Clarity of ceramic and ribbons, but with an ease that is hard to describe.
I've never heard loudspeakers with beryllium tweeters, so cannot offer an opinion on similarities/differences versus diamond membrane.
Another example: Many highend speakers use Thiel&Partner ceramic units. I sold Avalon for over 6 years if time, even to some of my best friends.
These speakers have in common that they often can create a wide and deep stage. But......when you listen to intimate acoustic concerts in real you will hear how small voices and instruments are in proportion. I call it intimate sound.
When you play this kind of music on speakers with Thiel&Partner units you will hear that instruments and voices become bigger than in real.
The other thing you often audition is that with a cello or double bass it colours it a little. I call this: a mjeah. It makes these instruments sounds thicker.
In the beginning of this year we visited an audio show and many new speakers overthere used paper. I thought; What the F....It reminds me of audio when I started in 1998.
The demos were so poor, these days we have much better materials. I also don't understand why B&W is using paper in some of their speakers these days.
Compared to 1998 when I started in audio, the quality of materials has improved a lot. Often they still use older materials.
Bo, you should get the Magico's and Vandersteens in that shootout. Carbon needs to be in this discussion. Again, we all know it's not totally about the material, it's about the implementation AND material. Carbon is very special in audio right now and depending on WHICH carbon fiber you are using, you will hear something different. There are so many new technologies that designers can use these days, that they are really making huge strides. Probably more than at any other time in audio history. Most older speaker technologies just don't sound as good as the new ones implemented properly. Regardless of WHAT type of sound we each like, all of us seem to love our newer speakers made from diamond, beryllium or carbon fiber. Someone moved the cheese and the landscape is changing with it.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
