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?

immatthewj

Showing 1 response by helomech

Those who denigrate hard domes and lump them all into the same category haven’t heard any quality ones. A good quality beryllium, diamond or carbon tweeter will outperform nearly any soft dome and sound less fatiguing in the process. Even the $300+ soft domes from Seas and Scanspeak do not sound as extended and realistic as a good beryllium to my ears. And most manufacturers are not employing soft domes near the caliber of a $350 Seas Excel. 

Even the $60 anodized aluminum tweeter from SB Acoustics outperforms a lot of pricier soft domes.