The midrange is the most important driver.

you should tweet your post

@erik_squires

In my main speakers the midrange unit is the most expensive one and the tweeter the cheapest, so the very reverse scenario of what you’re initially referring to. Among the traits of the mids driver one in particular may be a standout, namely how low it is able to extend and hereby meet the bass(-horn). Conversely the upper band of the (15") bass driver is vital, insofar in this case it extends to some 500Hz. Which brings us to the very important frequency range from what I can gather, with some arguing it may perhaps be the most important one, that of the upper bass to lower midrange. This area very much "grounds" or determines the overall sound with its proper energy and sheer ability to effortlessly move significant amounts of air (I’m not talking SPL’s here but rather energy and fullness, in a sense); so, if we maintain the premise of the importance of this frequency area in particular, and being that the lower mids to upper bass resides from somewhere between 150-200Hz and up to approximately 500Hz, the bass driver (and with my speakers its associating horn) and how it performs here is paramount. Given the cross-over though of ~500 Hz the performance of the midrange (plus horn) here is also a high priority, and that it reproduces this lower area of its band with ease and proper energy - not least also to uphold coherency (is there even a word like ’energy-coherence’?). To my mind the core midrange (and arguably upper midrange as well) is equally important, which brings us all the way up to some 4kHz, still within the band of the (in my case) midrange driver. I guess then from this one could deduce the tweeter to be the least important driver, and while I wouldn’t go that far I’m not really sympathetic with the notion of spending the most dough here. Perhaps this tendency, if it really is, could be symptomatic of the priority among many audiophiles to pursue "airiness" and extension here. Maybe the notion should be reversed that there’s really no less important driver, but that there are particularly audible pitfalls through the frequency spectrum (that also involves sheer radiation area and not least implementation) that calls for outright care and focus not to "fall into." Question is how much expenditure is an indicator through all of this, contrasted in a sense to care and implementation in finding and using the proper drivers? Just my $0.02.

Here is a sampler review in support of thie statement asserting the importance of a superior midrange performance:

http://stereotimes.com/speak121305.shtml

".... Immediate impressions are a clear and transparent portrayal with very high detail retrieval, fast and controlled transient response, and superb musical timing, both in articulating rhythms and tempi, and in placing instruments within the temporal flow and context of the performance. The RR125 is an outstanding mid/bass driver, sonically and musically right in line with the midrange performance of Rega’s amplifiers and phono cartridges. Get the midrange right and everything else will fall into place. Get it wrong, and all the king’s horses…"

All I can add is that of all the speakers I have heard, the best have always been the ones that get the midrange right, so I'd have to agree with your assertion.  That's where most of the music is.

Totally agree.

For high fidelity the order for greatest importance in a speaker

1) Mid range (300 to 3KHz)
2) Bass (40 to 400)
3) Tweeter (2KHz to 20KHz)

For BS hype Speaker marketing it is ALWAYS the tweeter that is emphasized most. This is entirely because a tweeter is the simplest and cheapest part in a speaker and easily upgraded or replaced. So spending huge extra amounts on a tweeter costs the maunfacturer the least $ for the maximum in marketing hype!

Sadly customers fall for this marketing trick all the time.

Worse than sad. Many of the fanciest Berylium unobtainium diamond tweeters contain cheap ferrofluid so that it is really CHEAP to make the tweeter, as the tooling and engineering precision can be really sloppy because the cheap ferrofluid just band aids everything!!! So within as little as two years this fluid has dried out and your super duper tweeter sounds dull and it is time to upgrade again!

Given that by far most of the musical content is in the 300Hz-3KHz frequency range, one could surmise that the quality of driver which covers that range plays the most significant role in the ultimate sound quality that is heard, assuming all else being equal. In my experience with multi-way speakers, I think how the sound transitions from one driver to the other is equally if not more important than each driver by itself.This discussion poses an interesting question of how this all applies to planar or ESL designs.

@kalali   Exactly!!  As a long time and current Vandersteen owner, you will scarcely hear a man as passionate about that very issue as Richard Vandersteen is.  All of his speakers have employed first order crossovers as he finds that strategy the best way to make speakers with a variety of drivers sound "of a piece".  That's what Vandersteen's catch phrase "Dimensional Purity" is all about.

I learned to listen on my original Quad ESLs, which I bought in 1973. They have a peerless midrange that, even 60 years after their introduction, is still considered a reference or benchmark. Living with them as a full range speaker poses a number of challanges-- very beamy high frequencies, requiring an almost head in vise listening position- an inability to play at stadium power levels (which I rarely do) and a roll off in the bass that is difficult to rectify by adding subwoofers. (Adjustment of the speaker within the room, changing their height and tilt can affect this).
To me, the first "tell" of a system that has artifacts is the midrange- if it sounds boxed in, or grainy (which may have as much to do with the amplification as the speaker), I’m pretty much out. I can tolerate sins of omission or other limitations such as those presented by the old Quad better than a compromised midrange. When I upgraded in around 1990 to a pair of Crosby Quads, I found that speaker to do everything better- it played louder, had more bass, the high frequencies weren’t as beamy, but it didn’t have quite the magic, the utter transparency, the spooky realism that the original Quad ESL did.
I switched to a horn-centric system in around 2006-7. One of the vital aspects of the horn (Avantgarde Duo, which is polarizing speaker- people seem to love or hate ’em, which is another subject) was its transparent midrange, which was, for me, brought to life with the Lamm ML 2 SET. The horn presents a different set of challenges- totally unforgiving of upstream components and there is a fine line in getting the bass right (short of having Jim Smith come to your home).

I have heard dynamic speakers that are, combined with the right electronics, also convincing in the mids, so I’m not advocating one type of speaker over the other, but there is still something unbeatable about those old Quads. I have, as mentioned elsewhere here, had my old pair restored, and they are set up in a vintage system in another room. I love them despite their limitations, and they sound even better to my ears today than when I had them as college student.

Dimensional Purity......I love that. Have no ideal what it means but it sounds so audiophile that I feel like I should believe it. 

Jim
Dealer of the month....probably not next month however..who shall we nominate?

Sometimes the most important driver is missing from full range speaker 

In my speakers by far the Voxativ mid - tweeter driver is some what expensive starting at $2500 A  pair.  Their top field coil driver  a staggering $32k a pair.  
Pure Audio Project  Loudspeakers  several choices for mid- tweeter to choose from as well as you put whatever capacitor you choose ,only 1 ,if using the series Xover.

Bud Fried, "85% of the music lies in the midrange."

My experience says that the lower mid bass is where most (75-80%) of the music presence is (60Hz-800Hz) and that is the critical part where the driver has to have the least amount of distortion, quick recovery and best tonality. 
You'll be surprised how little a signal the speaker drivers put out from 1Khz upwards. Still important to complete the full spectrum. 

if its a fullrange its the most important otherwise a loudspeaker is the sum of its parts and design 

@johnk

Of course, the end result matters more than the sum of the parts. What I wanted to get at here was more about how we think about full-range, multi-way loudspeakers a little more, and whether that was lopsided. I have to admit, I don't do this "right" if we go by spend. I spent about 2x as much on my tweeters, and my mid-woofers were pricey! :)

Best,

E

It’s not only the tweeter, midrange or bass drivers but the cabinet and crossover that make up the speaker. There is no doubt that the type and material of the drivers are important but from what I understand the crossover design and type or shape of the enclosure whether it’s a rigid or lossy design etc. are more significant considerations in speaker design. Most speaker designers would be able to advise on this aspect.

In the end, I believe the consensus would be everything is equally important ie. the sum of the parts and the way everything is assembled, combined and put up together. Nevertheless, if talking about aspects of sound quality whether the treble, midrange or bass is more important, my pick would be the midrange. Having said that, a balanced presentation will take precedence over anything else in real life.

"Dimensional Purity......I love that. Have no ideal what it means but it sounds so audiophile that I feel like I should believe it. "....*LOL*

Absolutely...but I'm stuck between wanting to get on the street with a protest sign and a bullhorn...or.....watching the tube and *tsk*tsk*ing those that Are, hearing the talking heads trying to make some sort of sense out of it.... "WTF does it Mean?!  Story @ 11....Maybe..."

I'd copyright that phrase on Monday, srl....otherwise it's 'public domain' and subject to repetition on the level of "White Xmas"....

....another suspicious phrase that just Happens to be a song, BTW....;)

So Paradigm got it right with the Persona series then with the beryllium mids, same as TAD with their be mids.

fangbian,

AFAIK, Yamaha was the first with a Be midrange, decades ago, but you are right, putting that in the midrange demonstrates a lot of thinking and care.

Best,

E

In many 2 ways tweeters have to cover much range thus can get costly and you may see tweeters costing more than woofers in such a set up. But in general you design a loudspeaker as a whole. Focusing on 1 aspect of a loudspeakers design as the most important shows a general misunderstanding of overall loudspeaker design. Otherwise if one wanted to give 1 part the most credit it would be fasteners and glues since without the whole thing falls apart.

@erik_squires - I guess I didn't take your post literally, in that I wasn't focused on the drivers, but that part of the musical spectrum. 

@whart

Sorry, but that's why I mentioned the "driver" in the title. :)

Johnk, some inexpensive drivers can go low. It's not as big a factor in pricing (more or less).

So let me turn this around. I think it's possible to make a good speaker with a great midrange and OK tweeter and woofer. I don't think it's possible to make an OK speaker with a mediocre mid. :)

Again, synergy matters, but I think that the idea we have (as a group) that the tweet technology determines pricing is flawed.

Best,

E

Unquestionably.

It is not all that matters though, of course.

Splitting the bandwidth into thirds, tweeters and bottom end MUST be represented, equally, if possible.

Pointing to anything past the mid range as being the next most important or as necessary, says as much about personal preffs as anything else.

All three sections of the bandwidth , if split only into thirds are required to deliver the information needed to recreate a musical event.

As much as I feel bass is the next priority following mid range info, it is the tweeter which IMHO has to be exceptionally well heeled for me to get into any speaker.

Until further notice, the Dynn audio Isotar, Esotar’, is the sweetest (read as best). Tweeter, I’ve owned, as it was formulated in a Silverline speaker. Although there are many amazing tweeter types, implementation and arrangement are just as vital. This tweeter resides in a number of speakers. Either its cheap or pretty good.

For the wildest tweeter technocracy check out the one in the Lanch 7s. whoa. An electrical field? Astonishing. WOW.

Esotar isn't cheap though, those drivers are expensive to buy through online sellers. And compared to a good ribbon tweeter lacks air and extension.

johnk1,314 posts11-25-2017 9:54pmIn many 2 ways tweeters have to cover much range thus can get costly and you may see tweeters costing more than woofers in such a set up. But in general you design a loudspeaker as a whole. Focusing on 1 aspect of a loudspeakers design as the most important shows a general misunderstanding of overall loudspeaker design. Otherwise if one wanted to give 1 part the most credit it would be fasteners and glues since without the whole thing falls apart.

Nice one John. I agree. A loudspeaker is designed as a whole and you can’t just pick out one element as being the most important criteria in sound reproduction. It is fine to favor the midrange more than the bass or treble ie. accepting a lower bass output or smoother and less extended treble, but to suggest the midrange driver as the most important aspect may not be exactly appropriate as there are other things involved. As you aptly put it, without glues or fasteners (assuming the speaker cabinet is not a one-piece but assembled together), the speaker would be incomplete. A speaker designer will be able to tell you how important the other bits are, especially the crossover where most of the sound is tweaked over there. A more intricate aspect of speaker design is to achieve a seamless integration between drivers to ensure a smoother delivery of the music.

To the OP - don’t get me wrong. I am not saying the midrange driver is unimportant. It’s just that it forms part of the equation although the type and material of the driver are important considerations in the design of a speaker.

I was going to point out the lengths B&W has gone to get the mid range driver. Nautilus, exotic materials, exotic, surround-less construction. Pretty spiffy.

Or, as a friend of mine puts it: "It all starts with the first octaves." Laying the proper groundwork for the sub frequencies here and successfully integrating them with the main speakers affects the whole of the remaining frequency span above in quite significant ways, including the all-important midrange, and not only for relieving the bass driver of the main speakers reproducing the signal downwards (if a high pass filter is used). I guess it goes to show the dependability of all involved.

Here's another way to think about this:

If we could only have 1 driver, it would have to be a midrange.

Best,


E

If only 1 driver I would use a fullrange or a electrostatic. And I use a fostex fe168e sigmas in my 1920s pair of giant RCA MI front horns.

@erik_squires, "If we could only have 1 driver, it would have to be a midrange."

Absolutely.  Several times, we began projects by simply running a midrange driver; often to just play around with that.  You'd wouldn't believe how many listeners would not realize a tweeter wasn't playing.  And, presuming you cross the woofer over at a low frequency, the same holds true there

Yes for the best midrange you must cross very low or go with a super tweeter...or no tweeter. Very few tweeters can play low enough. Compression drivers can. 

Kevlar is best material for midrange. 

@czarivey, Fried used a (the?) famous maker's kevlar drivers for while.  Unfortunately, they just didn't sound or measure well.  As Bud spent 1/3 of the year in Europe, he popped over for a visit to the factory in France, and demanded a set of measurements take place in his presence.

You can read between the lines, but the next iteration of the Fried line employed Gefco drivers

My guess would be that the carbon overlaid balsa wood driver in the Vandersteen Model 7 Mk.2 would be very difficult to beat, especially for quickness of response, as midrange drivers go.

From 500 Hz to 2000hz is the actual heart  of the Miidrange .
Low midbass from 250hz, upper midrange - treble all  the way to 4000 kHz
. The Midband without Any doubt is the most Critical part of all music 
Getting this right should be paramount, that is why Harbeth dedicated so much time To his patented mid  driver. One Step better and I feel the best drivers in the world From $2500- $32,000 a pair are the Voxativ wide band drivers .
Sonic purity is paramount in any great Loudspeaker !!

I find the idea of two different drivers doing the relay-race baton handoff in the midrange, that handoff being arranged via a x/o filter, a very undesirable situation. Fortunately, one needn't accept that scenario. The Eminent Technology LFT-8b's "midrange" magnetic-planar driver has a symmetrical 1st-order (6dB/octave) filter at 180Hz, and another at 10k. 180Hz to 10kHz from a single driver, with no filtering! Actually, there are two of the drivers (to create a line-source, and increase maximum SPL capability), one stacked atop the other, with a ribbon tweeter beside them, and an 8" dynamic woofer in a sealed enclosure below. For $2499/pr!

@bdp24  Three comments about the LFT-8b

1.  From you comments, it seems that they have similar placement restrictions to other "panel" speakers in that they sound best 5' out from the wall which is a problem for a lot of people
2.  Eminent Technologies seems to be well under the radar.  Not many people have heard them and there aren't a lot of places to go hear them...so, for a home trial, its probably going to cost a couple hundred dollars to send them back if you don't love them.
3.  If you buy a maggie and then decide in two years to move on, you will probably recoup 75% of your purchase price because of their repuation and strong following.  I suspect that your financial risk is much greater with the E.T. LFT-8b

As to the "midrange" question...whichever  combination of drivers/crossovers/boxes allow the reproduction of the piano, the acoustic guitar and the voice to be done in a way that provide the "your are there live" experience is the right starting point....but I think there has to be a recognition that the way I interpret/process the sound of a piano may be different than others...hence, why different solutions work for different people.

@bdp24  I would also say that I haven't heard cone speakers that were quite as convincing throughout the midrange although recently I heard the KEF R500s driven by the Parasound integrated and they were pretty darn good.

Given that you own planars and stats and that both have reputations for pure midranges....if you only had $2500 to spend and you already had a good sealed sub, which would you buy...the ET's...the Magnepan 1.7i...or something else....and why???

snapsc---A good sub frees one to pick the loudspeaker most appropriate for one’s priorities other than, of course, the lowest frequencies. Though vehemently disagreed with by many here, even the brilliant Ralph Karsten of Atma-Sphere, I consider that a matter best and predominantly determined by one’s musical diet. If, for instance, I listened mostly to small Baroque ensembles and Bluegrass (the two are related!), or Folk, Singer/Songwriter, and Vocal w/accompaniment, I would definitely go with the old Quad ESL. If I needed more maximum volume than the Quad is capable of providing, it would be the Eminent Technology LFT-8b, hands down. Retailing for $2499, it is only $400 more than the MG1.7i, and imo a superior loudspeaker. Harry Weisfeld of VPI recently stated he feels the LFT-8b provides the best midrange of any speaker, at any price, he has ever heard. He is not alone, yet almost everyone continues to ignore it. Weird!