The midi range, not the tweeter, is the most important driver in a speaker.

All you have to do is delete your post and start another one! 

The ability of a poster to delete his/her own posts seems to have been removed.

@erik_squires Come on now...You know better!  Every driver is as important as every other in any particular design if you want the music signal you have been so careful to preserve to be reproduced as faithfully as possible.  

Example...Take a Vandersteen Model 7 Mk.II and switch out the balsa/carbon tweeter for a model 2 metal dome.  Bye bye to the continuousness of the music.  Ugh!!

But conversely, if you could only use 1 driver in the Model 7 .... it wouldn't be the tweeter.

Wow i just popped my cookies!!

Just go in your profile and discussions started. You can delete from there. 

Of course, this is not up for debate.

Man, you must be conjuring up Kenjit here. 

Odd post. Maybe you mean the midrange of the music spectrum?

@erik_squires If I used only one driver in the Vandy Model 7 it wouldn't be a Vandersteen design!

Looking at the db meter during music playback I’ll agree the midrange driver in a 3 way gets the most work, but it’s the integration of the woofer and tweeter that make a hi end speaker special 

yes, the mid is the most critical and at the same time it is the most compromised by standard passive crossovers.

This reminds me of Seinfeld - "The top button makes or breaks the shirt".

This is wrong. If mids were the most important why dont you just buy yourself a pair of ATC midrange domes and stick them on some stands and call it a day? 
That would never sound high end. 

There is no such thing as the most important driver. Every driver is equally important DO NOT BE FOOLED

Unless the integration with box, XO & other drivers  is so egregious that it makes no difference that any POS would be equally as awful.

What about a 2 way 2k XO?

They are plenty of loudspeakers of yore that only had a great midrange and are considered world class. Quads, Apogees to name a few. If you get the midrange right in a loudspeaker you may not need anything else. 

Hi everyone:

To be clear, I was trolling a bit in good humor, but also wanted to point out that we pay a lot more attention to the tweeter than any other driver.

Scanning old posts lots of people are posting about tweeter materials, type, etc. It is rare indeed when a buyer is asking about say, a kevlar vs. paper mid or woofer.

And indeed, the prices for raw drivers seem to tilt towards tweets.

I remember reading a statement from Pat McGinty of Meadowlark Audio. "The tweeter illuminates the midrange". If the two don't work together correctly, it will not matter how good the midrange driver or the tweeter is. They are equally important to each other.

Double edge sword using metal drivers. All that added detail exposes the flaws in the recording, also harder to drive. 

Metal, kevlar, carbon, ceramic, hard composite etc mid and midbass drivers tend to have severe break up modes where the ear is most sensitive. (~3khz-5khz)

Then they require complex sharp slope crossovers to try and deal with their heavy break up modes. Which makes their problems...well... to keep it country simple..almost worse.

To simplify or conclude without getting into the complexities of trying to design with these drivers....IMO and IME...I don’t think they are worth the bother and find them to sound far worse than the solutions they propose to provide.

I’m talking about spending 20 years trying to find a single acceptable one among all of them. Just one. That..this is not a casual ill thought out comment.

I think that the inharmonic distortions that they produce in the highest sensitivity range of the ear..that people mistake these distortions as detail.

Where instead of learning past first impressions... of what detail in reproduced music actually is, they press the simple button and gain insight where none is possible. A falsified learning shortcut. (first answer found syndrome) This is common, due to how the mind works when it is questing/learning/etc.

An example of that... is how the Yamaha ns-10, a horribly distorting speaker, is prevalent in budget studios, as the distortions can reveal things to the mixer of the audio signal. They mix the music based on perceiving distortions in the critical hearing ranges.

Companies can only sell the people what the people are buying... so the the market in the high end, moved into these distorting mid bass composite and hard cone drivers.

It is this sort of thing that has helped a lot of the high end audio world march slowly but surely into low dynamic rang incoherent distorted screech that has been masquerading as ’revealed detail’.

And that is why you don’t see me and many others in these rooms with $500k systems (pick a $ number) in some rooms at shows, yet you see other people in those rooms in rapt attention, digging the sound of these whole signal chains. Awesome sound they say...

and others say, ’it’s the most grotesque distorted thing they’ve heard at the show so far’....

It’s a big mental divide.

@teo_audio 

Yamaha ns-10, a horribly distorting speaker

They are too revealing not distorting. They are used by the best recording studios. They could choose any speaker they like. 

" [The Yamaha NS-10’s] are too revealing not distorting. They are used by the best recording studios. They could choose any speaker they like."

The NS-10 is not an accurate speaker, but its value is this: If the mix sounds good on the NS-10, then it will sound good on just about anything. This makes it a useful tool, but it is never the only tool in the kit.

Duke

The big differences in the TAD line of speakers is the midrange.

The reference series uses the vapor deposited beryllium midrange, whereas all the other series use the magnesium midrange.

The beryllium tweeters and aramid cone woofers seem to be very similar across the line.

As far as problems metallic drivers, though I have owned the TAD CR-1’s for close to 9 years, I feel I haven’t really heard them until recently. Between the latest firmwear of the DS Dac and the EtherRegen’s isolation (and other tricks) the speakers, now freed up from some of the flaws in ethernet digital playback has yielded spectacular results and any harshness (like massed strings or trumpets) vanishes and what I am now left with the metallic bite and resonance of the trumpets and individual violinists doing their own thing in time and space.

Then they require complex sharp slope crossovers to try and deal with their heavy break up modes. Which makes their problems...well... to keep it country simple..almost worse.

I think Joseph Audio's use of magnesium drivers shows this is possible. A combination of judicious low pass filter + notch filter can make these work, no?


Best,

E

It's more interesting to discuss in term of midrange driver size.  Some people prefer smaller size mid for speed and clarity.  Mine has to be at least 5in large so they can better integrated to the 8in. bass at the low frequencies for example.  

Also I prefer the mid not playing at high frequencies where the tweeter should be playing on its own.  I would say 7KHz is the cutt off where the mid shouldn't interfere with the tweeter playing after this.

Sure if you have a 3in. mid that can play at much higher than 7KHz but then it would compromise the low frequencies.  It's all a trade off.  

What can I say Erik, you are absolutely correct!  

No, 100% disagree.  Every mid I've heard since early 70's i hated. 
I avoided all 3 ways with mid ranges past 40 yrs. 
I am sticking with  a  MTM, allowing the lower W18 to act in low fq.s the upper mid bass meeting the Millenium tweet which is really a  true Mid range/Tweeter. = you get 2 drivers in one. 
IHow is this possible?
I just understooda   few weeks ago, after owning the Thor MTM for now 17 years..The Millenium employed the latest technoogy at that time Neo magnet. Which is XXXX times more potent vs your old regular magnet tweet. 
The upper W18 carries the low mid fq's up to meet the low FQ's of the Millenium = No need fora  old basrking/coughing/blaring midrange. 
I HATE all/every midrange. 
Millenium, the finest midtweet ever designed. 
Finest tweet every tweeted. 
paul
the honest stereo review guy

@erik_squires ..Agreed, and my RTA’s and eq’s do as well. I’m monitoring both line And the ’room’ (the latter w/a calibrated mic into a ’stand-alone’ unit). Mid-range, as approached by the bulk of the ’conventional’ speakers marketed, is where voice and instruments Are....

And, Yes, the crossover is where the crux is....*serious stare*

And, this is Why I’ve moved to a digital xover since I don’t rely nor listen to a ’one box wonder’ for my ’listening distraction’. ;)

My ’reference’ amt’s will reach down to 500hz; below that, the sub picks up @ around 150hz.

That leaves a very important gap that’s important to infill. Currently I’ve using 6" with a 6" passive, quick enough to keep pace with the amt’s. And be x-overed to not compete with the subs.

The big issue for me is a woofer that’s fast enough to keep up with ’what’s above them’. *L* We all have our ’issues’, I guess....;)

...and I’m just an ’outlier’, anyway...
...and my Walsh are an entirely different animal...as well....

But, that’s what ’memory files’ is for...*L*

(*ah* Re 12/1 @ 12:04am: One has to watch what one ’trolls’, even if only in jest....’flame wars’ start with less.... ;) *G*)

To think about it, everything else being equal, the mid probably is more important than the tweeter.  But what's more important is the xover.  The designer will ultimately be the final decider as to the final sound.

woke up in early hours and realized a  thought about the OP query. OK, Mids extremely important. Thats obvious. 90% of the muisc is in the  low mids- upper mids fq's,. Any old woffer can give low bass, and old tweet can give super highs. 
Its this critical mid fq's which confront every  speaker witha  a  challenge. So far to my ears in the past 17 years, no speaker has delivered gorgeous mid fq.s as has the SEAS Thor. I wouldn't trade my Thors for any speaker in the world. None. 
= IOW I'd put my Thors + a  basic sub vs any speaker in the world, and woop arse on dynamics/sound stage/hi fidelity, and most of all , the human voice. Now grant it, the 845 tube will surely equal/surpass the Thor in light jazz, but in complex full blown classical/opera, the 845/FR will sound anemic as it struggles to juggle all the fq's filling the tubes plates with tons of fq's. 
= 1 845 can not perform what a  dual KT88/KT90/dual tube channel can handle. 
Also I should mention the SEAS Thor  requires/demands a high performance tube amp. 
My Cayin MT35 overloaded when attempting to push the Thors. Maybea  MT45 could handle the load, but prefered the MT50 or MT55, Or cayin KT88 4 tube chassis.  all three would be acceptable. The Thor's are~~~87db~~~ so only the finest tube amps are qualified, at least 45 RMS pure class A/B power = heavy duty high quality expensive japenese trans. 
As I say, the MT45 might be able to deliver to the Thors,,My Jadis Orch REfer  had no issues pushing the Thors. Jadis makes the worlds best trans. Next best are the japenese high quality trans,. which cayin anda  few other tube amps employ. along with the required guts. many chinese tunes amps have no guts,,its all empty shell. 
Here takea  look at the Thors kit parts,,,There is no way a  cayin MT35 gonna handle a  parts inventory such as the Thor.
IOW if you ain't got a  high fi tube amp, leave the Thors alone, go buya  B&W speaker. for Class D sound,.
Class D amp /Class D speaker.

https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/mtm-speaker-kits/new-thor-kit-pair/

@ Andy, yes the xover is critical. 
Which is why SEAS has engineered the xover for this Thor. The xover I have in my 2002ish Thors is the UPGRADE version,,which ain't saying much based on new technology since that time. in 2020, i will have madisound build a  new xover for the Thors,,all using Mundorf Silver/Gold,,not the SG supreme which are out my budget range. 
I did manage to buy  2 10uF Gold/Silver Sprene off Ebay at 1/2 price,, so will  ship these to Madisound and add the Silver/Gold caps /new R Ressist Mundorf and new coils,,The lower caps going to the low midbass i will use a  basic tin cap/Mundorf.
The Excel drivers will blossom with sound. The dead will come tIn 2020, i plan to make about 50++ vids documenting all my new tweaks. I plan to be #1 mod guy on YT. 

I think Joseph Audio's use of magnesium drivers shows this is possible. A combination of judicious low pass filter + notch filter can make these work, no?

The proposed solution does not really work. It gets rid of some of the left over phase shifted issues ...but...

Agree. Erik. That is where you herring is the most delineated. 

Many who build mediocre audio systems think this. 

twoleftears

Let’s pose this question another way:

within the normal range of human hearing, how many octaves are typically handled by 1. the tweeter, 2. the mid-range, 3. the woofer?

That’s not a particularly good way to consider the question, because the ear’s sensitivity is not equal at all frequencies. In addition, the spectral distribution of the sound of a band or orchestra is not equal at all frequencies. That’s why the OP’s premise is so defensible.

Most of the music is in the midrange.

I agree that the midrange region matters most, but not necessarily that the midrange driver itself matters most.  Imo how well the midrange driver works with its partners, the woofer & tweeter, matters more than the individual excellence viewed in isolation of any one of them.

(To extend that line of thinking, imo how well a speaker system works with its partners, the amp and the room, matters more than its individual excellence viewed in isolation.)

Duke

Is anyone still responding to Kinjit?

They are too revealing not distorting. They are used by the best recording studios. They could choose any speaker they like.

This is incorrect.

They are hardly used anymore at all. They have been surpassed by so many other monitors, it’s hard to count.

The NS10 have horrible frequency response. A huge (7db) peak at 2K, they are like 20 db down at 70 hz.

Modern recording engineers are baffled why they were ever so popular.

I’ve read comments on forums for recording engineers like; "I wouldn’t use them if they were offered to me for free, and quite frankly, I would be offended if they were offered to me".

Let me add, that I believe (I’m not the only one) that many people mistake that 2K bump as being ’revealing’, since it is close to the ’presence’ region, where the ears are most sensitive.

I have a friend that used to design speakers for a living (Harmon industries in Los Angeles). He once made minor modifications to a pair of NS10 crossovers to remove the hump (a simple mod, with no other changes made to the crossovers), and they ended up sounding ridiculously mundane and pedestrian.

the hardest frequencies to get correct are 40hz-250hz in the mid and upper bass.

(1) it’s the power frequencies where vocals, drum kits, cello’s, and piano’s either live or die. (2) it’s where the room will have the greatest things to say and (3) where your amplifier will be the most stressed. (4) it’s where you likely have a crossover. (5) it’s where you need linearity, but (6) are typically short of headroom in driver surface. so (7) excursions are excessive.

micro-dynamics, slam, and explosiveness in the music is in these frequencies. the 'life' of the music. 

and the higher the dynamics of the music the greater the failure in this area. big music requires this part to be fully sorted out.

which driver covers this range varies from speaker design to speaker design. mostly it’s 2 drivers, or multiple drivers of two types.

in the most ’uber’ well thought out systems it’s this part that gets fully done. lots of systems get the mids right. this is the hard part. and the break thru area of ultimate performance.

and this is where alternate driver types (horns, panels, omni) fail. they struggle with coherence here.

Eric Alexander of Tekton uses multiples of tweeters (14) from 270 Hz up to 2500 where he crosses over to a designated HF tweeter which is the same as the 14 used as midrange drivers. So in his flagships with 15 tweeters the same driver(s) are both midrange and tweeter.

@ MikeLavigne Great post, summing things up ~~w/o bias, no distortion~~~
I was not aware of the fq range numbers for voice/cello/piano/other important instrumentation, particular to classical muisc. 
For light classical (- nota  orch in full bloom) most speakers can handle the fq's voicing. Again , some may  prefer speaker A's warmer sound, = B&W othersa  sharper more clinical sound = SEAS especially their top design The Excel series. 
You pinned down the critical fq phase, for all my classical, especially voice, 40-250,,and i guess this is why SEAS designed the MTM, which offers 2 midwoofers ddoing the job in this range = offering a  fuller soundstage. 
I always wondered how to incorporate the 20-40 hz's, now with a  new pre amps avaliable  having to pre outs, i can employ a sub amp/woofer. 
So ideally the Thor is the best speaker for voicing a  full orchestra. 
The  1 thing to keep in mind with the Thor, is one needs a amp taht can handle the low sensitivty. @ 87db. ,,no wait, its 89db, yet 4 ohms, = requiring/demanding a  Class A amplifier, Specs say 50-400 watts, You obviously do not need 400 watss, as that high wattage will shed the surrounds. 
Yet 50 watts, will have to be Class A 50, not Class A/B, as my cayin MT35, rated A/B/32 watts ultralinear proved no match for the Thors and the trans quicjkly over heated. 
My guess the cayin MT45/50/55 might just barely make the grade to drive the Thor. The Jadis orch Refer had no issues at all. and the speaker responded with full bloom,,,I never tried other tubes, than the stock EI's, which have a  good reputation, but as  trejla has mentioned, the EI's may bea  bit over rtaed, and in this i agree. They hada   top end *steely* harshness at times,,but the voice/soundsatge was likea  real live show in your living room with jazz. I wish I had rolled the KT90's to KT88's and others, before i sold it. 
Truly a  Class A/b amp, The trans very  high quality. 
The 2 bias controls/treble/bass, near worthless. 
Best amp for the thors ona  budget is the Cayin KT88. Or Muzishare or Line magnetic, all 3 offering powerful trans, all near Class A energy. 
The thors need a  class A power, A/B  power is sacrificing /debilitating the quality of the speakers complex components. 
Years ago, there were few class A push pull amps that were afforadble, Now with the 3 main chinese lines of amps, its all within  reach of a reasonable budget. 
This is how i arrived at  the term, Class A speaker. 
Class A cd player. If you want Class A sound, you can not have a  Class A amp and the other components less than.
A
A/B
A/b
B
C
D 
F
 You need to figure out where each of your components fall. 
You can takea  Class \A/b component and make it pure Class A, but employing mods, which i am in the process of doing. 

My Thors with 2001 xover parts is really a  class A drivers with class A xover design, but parts, are now Class A/b or even B rated, since latest tech developmernts have been offered, = Silver, even Gold/Oil. 
Thus the excel drivers are pure Class A, but with xover parts being Class B, lowers , debilitates the Excel drivers to a  Class A/b performance. By updating the xover parts, the Excel drivers can now become true Class A voicing. 

Hope some of this clarifies the issues we are all facing in our quest to acheive pure true, no fake Class A fidelity in our systems performance/muisc reproduction. 


http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=382:thor-seas-diy-kits&catid=66&Itemid=365

Here is a Q for the board, 
The SEAS Trym is a 2 way, 87 db, yet rated a  better 8 ohms. 
Here is my Q.
Will a  845 amp work under the load of a  low sensitive speaker ~~rated 87 db~~~ yet 8 ohms...IOW will the tube have issues with the impedance of 87 db?  Maybe not full  orch, but as in  chamber, which i have a  good collection of. 
I may be interested in a  2nd system and want to hear the magic of the 845. 
My guess is the voicing of the 40-250 fq's will be anemic/weak. 

I just cked the specs,,says highly recommended 50 pure class A watts, = 845 is not recommended. ....
I want the Trym, but which tube amp to deliver the goods?


http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=384:trym-seas-diy-kits&catid=66:seas-diy-kits&Itemid=365

 

I find that the most discerning/challenging speakers have a low impedance point in the 100-150 Hz range.

The Trym's impedance in this range is nice at ~ 8 Ohms or higher throughout the bass. Should be an easy load, with plenty of strength there.

Based on the frequency plot, it will benefit from being 2' or closer to a rear wall.

As for the mention of the Thor, I do have a bit of a soft spot for the Seas Magnesium drivers. They have a unique warmness on the mid and lower mid but very natural, and at the same time, very detail like a hard cone. It took a bit of time to break in and probably may be the longest of any drivers I’ve had. At first they sound a bit cold and clinical, but once fully broken in, it’s all fine. They have a bit of a break up so just be mindful of the xover.

I currently have a pair of speakers that use the Seas Nextel 5.5in driver and the magnesium has the exact the same dimension so it’s a one to one swap. Hm... I have might an itch to get a pair.

But is the mid more important?  Probably but it needs the right tweeter to make a perfect dance partner.  

Hey Andy, I do not see a  listing for the Nextel 5.5 mid,,I do see a  listing fora  SEAS Nextel midtweet, does have the neo magnet of its bigger brother, the Millenium,,the Nextel tweet hasa  higher 92db efficeny,,the Millenium is very low at 89 or 87, can't recall. 
SEAS hasa   new  nano cone W22, which is built on new dewsign materials,,,Its quite expensive , but if you could have Madisound build youa  2 way with the SEAS W22 Graphene + Millenium with Mundorf Silver Oil caps (or whatever cap you can afford, IMHO, that might bea  superior way to go vs the Thors. 
This way, you might not needa  sub, as the W22 will pick up the low fq's very nicely and the Millenium will meet the W22 effectively. 
Basically you are getting the Trym , but witha  superior W22.
Instead of rebuilding my Thor xovers,,I may put that cash in the W22 Graphene+ Millenium. Have to chat with madisound's tech guys, see what their opinion is ,,they havea  great friendly straightup crew ready to assist. 
If you geta  quote on the design, please pass it on.
paul
huge SEAS fan down here in new orleans

Just cking Madisounds web,,no listing for the W22 Graphene,,,so had to google,,now i know why, the W22 Graphene was just released last month, 
Price will be $600+ I am sure, as the W19 Grap is $529. 
She looks a  dandy,,, 


https://audioxpress.com/news/seas-announces-excel-graphene-w22-8-inch-woofer-launch

Andy the W19/Graphene has a super low sensitivty, 85db,,so the W22 will have same,,,= rules out any dream ofa  845 amp. 
Thats the trade off, I miss out on the 845's dreamy liquid mesmerizing mids in chamber/light classical (= 845 can not reproduce complex orchestra),,but the SEAS W22 + Seas T25002 offers its own magical sound world. 
and can handle both complex thick classical and obviously light classical/chamber.
+ The SEAS T25 voices the human voice like no other tweet I've heard, as it isa  true rare Midtweet has that NEO magnet system. 
I see your Nextel 5.5, has HEX magnet, good, but not Neo magnet system, 
The Neo magnet allow the amp superior power, as the super powerful Neo magnet draws the currect of electrons/=The Siemens,  at a  much quicker pace = less resistance to the amp = cleaner sound. 

I have nothing against the Magnesium Seas line, but I have to be a fanboy and plug the Scanspeak Revelators which is what I use. Warm, and in the right (i.e. large!) cabinet, have amazing bass for the size. If you are doing a 2-way I highly recommend them. :)
Of course, this is a hobby and fun so pick what you like, I just reserve the right to be a fanboy from time to time. :)

Yes the Scan Rev looks likeav  awesome bass response,,But I am not into heavy bass. 
I need midarnge as all my muisc is classical, no bass guitar, no heavy drums. 
= as per OP, Midrange is the most important fq's in any speaker. 
SEAS wins out big time. 
sure the SEAS are 2x's the price of Sacn.s , but if we are going to buy $$$$$$$$$$ amps, why not speand a  few extra bucks and get the most critical compoenet of our systems. 
I've heard $100K Jadis systems on a  YT vid at a  LV show,, sounded like crap, ,,why?
Speakers were 100% crapo. 
Go figure.  
I hope folks realize, big is not always better. Some folks tend to think wow, look at the huge speakers here,,,they MUST BE GREAT SOUNDING,,,haha, Graets ound can come froma  2 way and bow out speakers with 20 drivers. 
I've heard this way back in 1974, The big Macintosh had 25 drivers in each cabinet,,,The interphase A1's  witha  passive radiator woofer +  woofer, anda  tweet<<<< blew the $$$$$$$$$ Macintosh out the water>>>
Go figure. . 

I never said the Scanspeaks lacked in midrange. They are wonderful. I only meant to say they also had big deep bass in the right cabinet. Never said they were chest thumpers either.


The integration of a speaker with the room is so critically important and why a good 2-way can outperform a lot of other speakers. Smaller = less problems in the lower octaves.


But ... speakers with built in room correction in the lower octave can perform even better. :)