Whizzer cone drivers

Indeed, there are both good and bad FR drivers, yet I don;t think we should toss out the lot in the bin because there are some bad apples, and a myriad of poor applications. Then I guess the entire loudspeaker industry would end up in the garbage disposer, as this situation applies for all kinds... the optics favors multi-way simply because there's 1000-10.000 band-limited driver to 1 FR in the market, so we have vastly higher chance to run into a good multi-way system compared to a good FR.

I have played around heavily with FR for 20+ years (and non-FR as well). Also, I have a lot of friends who played heavily with FR, and I have helped design and build quite a few of them. Of all, two were only relatively full range (capable of rendering authentic timpani and church organ), the rest of the lot frequency limited with limited appeal. (Beautiful in my opinion, yet many audiophiles think that's time to demand a sub.)

Yeah I know "full range" nomenclature pisses loads of folks off, as it's not reproducing 1mHz to 200kHz, which is the actual full range for human experience (which goes well beyond the canonical auditory 20Hz-20kHz). The full range nomenclature applies to the fact that all you hear is generated by a single voice coil, and the source is a point source without horizontal/vertical misaligned axes of multiple drivers. 

The vast majority of FR speakers, especially commercial applications suffer gravely from frequency limitations, especially in the bass region, and as OP emphasized, badly integrated whizzer cones.

Yet, not every whizzer cone is badly integrated.

There is one FR driver that seems to break away from the freq limitation curse, AND has a wonderfully integrated whizzer (although not-paper). The Cube Audio Fc8 driver, in my Voigt pipe cabinet is delivering a very wide frequency range - not just in theory, but fully energized sound. How about the top end? I have not measured it. Yet, my hearing extends to 20kHz, and I can report that the top end / air is among the best, and certainly most authentic and most coherent I've heard comparing to any multi-tweeter solutions. How's the low end? It energizes the room down to 25Hz. Yes, not just reproduced frequency, but you feel the energy coming alive - immediate raw power. How's the whizzer cone? It's completely disappearing. Sounds as if there's no whizzer cone at all, no auditory clues to its existence. Not even a slightest hint to a Lowther-shout (Lowther being the poster-child for the wost-possible whizzer integration).

How's the imaging? Cannot pinpoint the drivers location with closed eyes. I can sit, stand, walk around in the room and the 3D soundstage stays, and I have still no clue as to their location. I'm not a beginner in this driver-pointing game.. after spending 10 min with any speaker I can spot out each individual driver, no matter how well they do the disappearing act. Not with the Fc8, and they have been breaking in for about a month, so I had plenty of time to study.

So, in summary I think the whizzer technology is not dead yet. The Fc8 in VP has frequency range coverage that violently shames most multi-way speakers. I can count on one hand the multi-driver systems that play on that level that the Fc8/VP does. The rest does a lot more poorly. The covered frequency range is not just the biggest benefit. No crossovers means no sudden phase shifts, no major changes in how each band reacts to the amplifier, etc... as they say, total game changer, to hear uniform sound instead of pieced-together pieces. No matter how well pieced together, the brain will recognize the seams after you've been living with a multi-way speaker (or added sub) for a while....

So, while an well-intergated whizzer is rarer than a golden goose's egg, it does exist. Took me 20+ years of digging to find. ;

Try listening to Cube Nenuphar V2's with a tube amp (low damping factor) and let your ears decide how this particular whizzer cone driver sounds. 

For SS amp, Enleum AMP23R does very well with the Cube driver. 

Oh, btw...toss some cotton 'fluff' into the cones, it tames the 'cone honk' I notice from an open cone....the 'Rudy Vallee/megaphone' quality that's the main drawback....

That, and the cone really needs to be flipped vertically as it radiates more at your knees, but that's why the old Ohms work so well... ;)

....while drilling about for details and examples of omni approaches of the past and present to put some sense into my Walsh project, I ran into this:

http://www.roger-russell.com/omni/omni.htm#onea

If you shortcut to the Hegeman 1a and the Eico portions, these ’whizzer variants’ were simple enough for me to half-tush a pair diy out of curiosity.

Surprisingly enough for something so simple to accomplish, it’s interesting to make a whizzer cone respond in an omni fashion, albeit vaguely directional.
If the slant of the cone is handled in ’sweet spot’ fashion, it works.

The hardest part is ’rolling’ a cone with a 45 deg. angle in a lightweight enough material to not hinder the drivers employed, but...

No static 'over driver' cones. either.....and not as effective as a full Walsh omni driver. but cheap thrills on the quick. *G*

It’s (imho) the only application of a whizzer cone that actually makes a difference.
That, and the patent filed for the method predates the original Ohm/Walsh patent, which makes one wonder....🤷‍♂️

Forward, into the past....*L*

@atmasphere  one more right post

enabled by the lack of hysteresis inherent in all inductor and capacitor based crossovers.

I get why driving speakers directly can sound better, but this explanation isn't it.

IME working with 'full range' drivers over the last 20 years they simply aren't. You need both a tweeter and a sub to really make them work.

Whizzer cones seem to often suffer breakups. These are easy to see if you use pink noise and spectral analysis (which is available as an app for a smartphone).

I have heard, and liked several woofer-assisted wide band speakers.  The Cube Audio Nenuphar Basis is a good example.  It is not just that the woofer adds lower frequency support, the overall sound, including the midrange and upper frequencies sound smoother and better balanced.  I've also heard, and liked, the other way--a tweeter added to a full-range driver.  While that approach also does extend the frequency range of the system, the main thing it does is smooth out harsh peaks in the upper midrange.  There are many ways to use full-range drivers, and ways to tame harsh peaks or nasal coloration or other faults while retaining the incredible speed and dynamics of such drivers.  

While we are talking about how to extend the resposne of a single driver, I encourage you all to look up "Woofer-Assisted Wide Band."

Essentially a two-way with a very low crossover point vs. the traditional 2kHz or so crossover point used by most modern 2-way designs.

The holy grail of these drivers is a flat power response combined with the transient capabilities enabled by the lack of hysteresis inherent in all inductor and capacitor based crossovers. Sonically, that is an immediacy and clarity traditonal speakers simply cannot achieve. The flip side is this is very difficult to accomplish due to the competing requirements.

Kingharold,

You have an interesting system. I’ve heard, and really liked, the BD3 driver and I also like Fostex bullet tweeters, particularly when they are crossed in very high up in frequency.  What kind of woofers do you use, and what horn loading do you employ?  I like your use of a full-range driver to handle the midrange.  While I am a fan of horn midrange drivers, this typically requires a crossover at 500 hz or even higher, and modern, big, high efficiency woofers aren’t made to come in that high in frequency.  A full-range driver can easily reach low in frequency so that is not a problem.  

I use 8 inch drivers with a whizzer cone, AER BD3s, in my Oris 150 horns.  They sound splendid over the range of 200 Hz to 8 kHz which is their pass band in my triamplified fully horn loaded DIY speakers.  Horn loaded fifteen inch woofers play the music from 200 Hz down to 25 Hz where their output is identical to that at the 1 kHz reference.  Fostex t900a bullet tweeters play above 8 kHz.  I swear if the whizzer causes any distortion or other problems it is not audible to me or my audiophile friends.

@aldnorab  Whizzer is the small cone attached or glued to main cone, Whizzer got resonance  4000-6000hz depending of size , nothing magic, you can pointed whizzer as mechanical tweeter with poor ability over 8-10 khz., But many from us especially most popular audiophile age , older 60 , dont listen anything above 12Khz.

I've only heard Lowther. They were used as giant midranges In a 3 way horn system. Besides crossovers, they also had transformers. Also heard Supravox field coils in another system. Don't think they used whizzer cones. Both systems sounded great.

Don't understand how whizzers work. If the main cone can't produce high frequencies, why would adding a whizzer help? Hasn't that added even more mass to a driver that weighs too much to reproduce high frequencies?

Thanks,

aldnorab 

There is not one driver or speaker that is for everyone, so I have no problem with someone not liking whizzer cone speakers.  I have heard, a liked, a small number of speakers employing such drivers so I don't rule them out categorically.  Have you heard the Voxativ Ampeggio speaker or any speaker employing Voxativ full-range drivers?  Have you heard the AER full-range drivers?  I've heard several systems employing Voxativ full-range drivers, in both single driver and multi-way systems, and some systems were very good.  Some were not to my taste, but, that is par for the course with ANY driver.  

I wish the better drivers were cheap.  Clearly builders are not using these drivers just to avoid the cost of a good tweeter.  The top Voxativ field coil speaker is $70,000 a pair (I have not heard this driver) and the top AER driver is in the same price range.  I suppose this is "cheap" if the alternative is using something like the top G.I.P. field coil tweeter in a multi-way system ($60,000 a pair); I've heard that tweeter and it is good, but it is not THAT good.

The Lowther Shout of Zu Cubes was nothing but ear piercing for me.

@esarhaddon 100% first post which i wainting . Whizzer cone came from audio pro and , no matter size and brand this is cheap alternative good tweeters . i know some desagree and say -we listen ther , we listen , we liten and sound very good

I hate even seeing them. Though they can balance out a driver, I feel that the driver was inadequate, to begin with. You are trying to get something out of a speaker than what the cone sans the Whizzer can produce. It is a cheap bridge from say having a single-driver system, compared to a two or three-driver system. I have a meter that graphically shows me a graph including the immediate frequency and the sustained fall-off. You can get an app for your celliophone that shows you a similar representation, 'Decibel X'. I have the ability to take an individual speaker out of the circuit and see what is left. and yes there are tones made by the larger speakers that MIGHT in some ways fill in the upper tones, but I build crossovers with the intention of taking those frequencies OUT and leaving it up to the next higher-frequency speaker to take over. If you don't like what a bookshelf speaker sounds like you have the option of getting a stand-mounted or floor-standing speaker, to begin with.

Single driver for the widest frequency range.

My wife wanted me to buy the Cicada's way back when (her favorite color is Red).

DeKay

I have Moth Audio Cicadas on my TV system, I stare at those whizzer cones all day! 

Charney offers several choices for their full-range driver.  I've heard the Voxativ and AER driver in their Companion line of speakers.  I like the AER more than I do the Voxativ, but, both drivers are excellent in that speaker.  I find the Charney single driver full range system to be more naturally balanced and less peaky than the Cube Audio Nenuphar system, but, the Nenuphar Basis (two way system with a powered woofer) is a different beast and I really like that system--vibrant, rich, and capable of filling a very large room.  These whizzer cone systems do demand careful speaker placement and listening on the preferred axis (i.e., small listening window), but,  all speakers really do have a small ideal listening window anyway.

@bache 

As has been pointed out, implementation is the big variable. Many who’ve heard it find the Cube Audio Nenuphars to sound exceedingly good. It’s considered to be one of the best single driver full range speakers currently available.

Charles

PS - As a DIY speaker maker, I can see how boring it may get to chase the "best" drivers all the time.  DIY is about fun and experimentation so I think some whizzers may make for a fun time building.

Follow the money.

bache:

I have a pair of vintage Elac S-517 8" wide band drivers that sound very good in fairly  large BR cabs with no baffle step correction.

Some owners/sellers thought the whizzer was metal, but I believe it to made out of some sort of metal-ized plastic.

I've experimented with other vintage and older Coral/R&A/Fostex drivers (with whizzers) and these (the Elac) are the ones that I kept and still use.

I also use Stephens Trusonic 80FR drivers that have a metal dust cap, but no whizzer.

The Elac's I kept were private labeled by Herald Electronics (I sold the identical Elac branded pair for $300, but now wish that I had kept them as they rarely come up for sale in decent shape - mine are like new).

https://thumbs.worthpoint.com/zoom/images1/1/0511/01/vintage-elac-s517-dameter-round_1_e4c9d3dc0612a8d54c92f8db142dee58.jpg

DeKay

I think in DIYaudio.com you’d find a lot of people being more willing to engage on this topic. :)

There are some big fans of those and even paper and phenolic ring tweeters. Perhaps they mate well with the music / period they listen to.

@russ69  Because people like it , i dont now why

Because it works better than not having a whizzer cone? 

Yes, i have a lot good feedback from Charney Audio,  They using Vixative drivers.

It is mostly about the implementation.  Have you heard any of the Charney Audio speakers using such drivers?  These are surprisingly complete, smooth, and well balanced systems.  I like systems using such drivers as wide range drivers in multi-way systems, such as the Cube Audio Nenuphar Basis (powered woofer plus a fullrange driver).  

However, I have also heard some pretty rough, peaky sounding systems using these types of drivers; it is a matter of finding a good implementation of this approach to making speaker systems.

Point source?