It’s all in the implementation. The crossover plays a most important role in determining how the tweeter will be utilized in the context of the design (in crossover frequency, rate of roll-off, and shape of slope). The speaker enclosure also plays a role (in diffraction, dispersion, frequency support, and back-wave control). Just when you think you have the sound of different types of tweeters figured out, a design comes along that changes your perception. A safe recommendation would be to judge the high frequency fidelity of speakers you are interested in by how they sound to you rather than based on the type of tweeter being used.
soft dome versus hard dome tweeters
As my internet window shopping continues, I was reading on some speakers that listed for the tweeter textile dome and also silk dome.
So then I used the 'search discussion' function on this site on the subject of soft versus hard dome tweeters and it seemed as if most of the members who offered opinions used that "harsh" and "fatiguing" and "ringing" to describe how they felt about hard dome speakers. In the admittedly short time that I spent reading, I was not picking up a lot of love for hard dome tweeters.
But there are reputable speaker manufacturers that seem to have gone the extra mile to make their hard dome tweeters as hard as possible using, for example, beryllium or artificial(?) diamond dust.
I wouldn't expect a consensus on much of anything audio, but did I just by luck to find responses by mostly people who prefer soft dome tweeters? Because if they really sound that bad (harsh/fatiguing/ringing) in comparison, why would reputable manufacturers choose this route? And I do realize that appreciation of a sonic effect is subjective, so did I just happen on responses by members who had mostly the same subjective perception?