Are Super tweeters worth it?

[JustJones]

You know you're old when the super tweeter is really the mid driver.

 

[Anton D]

You know you're old when the super tweeter is really the mid driver.

 

[dualazmak]

Although quite belated, I just came across with this interesting thread.

Since loudspeakers are generally omnidirectional at low frequencies and extremely directional at high, a supertweeter or additional, uncorrelated tweeter can have a positive effect if it is used to bring more HF energy into a room which is likely absorbing it very quickly. Many speakers (older Revel, Wilson to name 2) use rear mounted tweeters for this reason, and dipoles do this naturally. The wide dispersion at low frequencies and narrow at high gives box speakers an intrinsically dark sound, since when they are voiced flat on axis, the total sound they radiate is dominated by low frequencies. This is why many speakers have elevated treble (or at least, one of the reasons.)

In theory a supertweeter could help the problem, but it would have to be used around 4K and up, as opposed to 10K, and it would have to be located a good foot away from the existing tweeter and probably face the rear. When HF sources are pointing away from each other and separated by many wavelengths their interactions are so complex as to be fairly benign.

However, most supertweeters I see on the market are ribbons or planar drivers, which have poor dispersion, which defeats the purpose. Something like a hiquphon or seas 19mm tweeter would be a better choice. Not sure what the state of the art in small tweeters is right now.

My follow-up of @Dinesh Menon's recent activities fortunately guided me to above nice information and suggestion, and it again reminds (and encourages) me the very unique supertweeter (FOSTEX T925A) physical positioning in my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active stereo audio project with 3-way SPs (woofer, midrange, tweeter) plus supertweeters and L&R subwoofers. The latest total system setup can be found here on my project thread.

You would please refer to my specific post here on the subject; after my rather intensive listening tests, tweeter and supertweeter are far separated and they are sitting above and beneath the woofer+midrange(squawker), respectively.

Furthermore, the Fq coverages of tweeters and supertweeters are well overlapped in my setup; Be-tweeters cover ca. 6 kHz - 20 kHz, and the metal-horn supertweeters cover ca. 8.8 kHz - 25 kHz in relatively low gain. You would also refer to my posts here and here for the details.

My post here and here regarding the implementation of safe and flexible on-the-fly (while listening to music) relative gain control of supertweeters (and tweeters, if needed) would be also of your reference and interest.

I well know many people (almost all the people) using supertweeters placed above the main SP unit, i.e. just above tweeters. Nevertheless, if you would be interested, I suggest you to try and evaluate the unique positioning of mine, beneath the main SP cabinet, if you actually have such positioning space (beneath the woofer) in your SP setup.

 

[Dinesh Menon]

Although quite belated, I just came across with this interesting thread.


My follow-up of @Dinesh Menon's recent activities fortunately guided me to above nice information and suggestion, and it again reminds (and encourages) me the very unique supertweeter (FOSTEX T925A) physical positioning in my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active stereo audio project with 3-way SPs (woofer, midrange, tweeter) plus supertweeters and L&R subwoofers. The latest total system setup can be found here on my project thread.

You would please refer to my specific post here on the subject; after my rather intensive listening tests, tweeter and supertweeter are far separated and they are sitting above and beneath the woofer+midrange(squawker), respectively.

Furthermore, the Fq coverages of tweeters and supertweeters are well overlapped in my setup; Be-tweeters cover ca. 6 kHz - 20 kHz, and the metal-horn supertweeters cover ca. 8.8 kHz - 25 kHz in relatively low gain. You would also refer to my posts here and here for the details.

My post here and here regarding the implementation of safe and flexible on-the-fly (while listening to music) relative gain control of supertweeters (and tweeters, if needed) would be also of your reference and interest.

I well know many people (almost all the people) using supertweeters placed above the main SP unit, i.e. just above tweeters. Nevertheless, if you would be interested, I suggest you to try and evaluate the unique positioning of mine, beneath the main SP cabinet, if you actually have such positioning space (beneath the woofer) in your SP setup.

Thanks Sir, honoured to be mentioned in your post, happy that I could be of some help to you.
Sony and Panasonic use Super Tweeters in their home audio systems.
They should learn proper placement for best results from you.

 

[617]

Although quite belated, I just came across with this interesting thread.


My follow-up of @Dinesh Menon's recent activities fortunately guided me to above nice information and suggestion, and it again reminds (and encourages) me the very unique supertweeter (FOSTEX T925A) physical positioning in my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active stereo audio project with 3-way SPs (woofer, midrange, tweeter) plus supertweeters and L&R subwoofers. The latest total system setup can be found here on my project thread.

You would please refer to my specific post here on the subject; after my rather intensive listening tests, tweeter and supertweeter are far separated and they are sitting above and beneath the woofer+midrange(squawker), respectively.

Furthermore, the Fq coverages of tweeters and supertweeters are well overlapped in my setup; Be-tweeters cover ca. 6 kHz - 20 kHz, and the metal-horn supertweeters cover ca. 8.8 kHz - 25 kHz in relatively low gain. You would also refer to my posts here and here for the details.

My post here and here regarding the implementation of safe and flexible on-the-fly (while listening to music) relative gain control of supertweeters (and tweeters, if needed) would be also of your reference and interest.

I well know many people (almost all the people) using supertweeters placed above the main SP unit, i.e. just above tweeters. Nevertheless, if you would be interested, I suggest you to try and evaluate the unique positioning of mine, beneath the main SP cabinet, if you actually have such positioning space (beneath the woofer) in your SP setup.

Very interesting discussion. I think this kind of experimentation is the best instinct of the audiophile. Off-the-shelf products are designed for the masses, but only someone serious about musical enjoyment will build a system that is responsive to their exact musical taste.

One of the issues with supertweeters is that they are extremely directional, and so small changes in seating position could be the difference between hearing something and hearing nothing from them. This could explain some of the sensitivity to positioning.

I would experiment with running the supertweeter at an elevated level (perhaps up to +10db) but pointed towards the rear of the room, directly at a very hard surface, perhaps stone or glass. I think getting as much of this energy bouncing around the room would serve to create ambience.

 

[Dinesh Menon]

Very interesting discussion. I think this kind of experimentation is the best instinct of the audiophile. Off-the-shelf products are designed for the masses, but only someone serious about musical enjoyment will build a system that is responsive to their exact musical taste.

One of the issues with supertweeters is that they are extremely directional, and so small changes in seating position could be the difference between hearing something and hearing nothing from them. This could explain some of the sensitivity to positioning.

I would experiment with running the supertweeter at an elevated level (perhaps up to +10db) but pointed towards the rear of the room, directly at a very hard surface, perhaps stone or glass. I think getting as much of this energy bouncing around the room would serve to create ambience.

Similar to direct/reflective design of Bose 901. Your idea is also novel and innovative. Maybe you have found the perfect positioning of Super Tweeters.

 

[Mojo Warrior]

NO

Most music has very little content at very high frequencies.
Most of us have very little ability to hear above 14k Hz

 

[617]

NO

Most music has very little content at very high frequencies.
Most of us have very little ability to hear above 14k Hz

I agree, and I would run such hf augmentation above 5khz or so

I don't think people really realize how high that is, well into upper harmonics of most musical things.

 

[Dinesh Menon]

NO

Most music has very little content at very high frequencies.
Most of us have very little ability to hear above 14k Hz

That's the general perception.
They are used to supplement the sound of tweeters with more airy-ness.
Designed to reproduce ultrasonic frequencies over 20 kHz, beyond the limits of human hearing.
Wikipedia say it's designed for psychoacoustic testing, for extended range of Super Audio CD intended for audiophiles, and for biologists performing research on animal response to sounds.
Ribbon tweeters have been made that can reproduce 80 kHz - 100 kHz.
You are right, we don't have the content to play in that range and the hearing capacity to enjoy it.
But it's very useful for biologists.

 

[dualazmak]

I agree, and I would run such hf augmentation above 5khz or so

I don't think people really realize how high that is, well into upper harmonics of most musical things.

Yes, this is the point of our current discussion, I agree.

My Beryllium dome tweeter covers 6 kHz - 14 kHz with the low-side high-pass filter of mild -12 dB/Oct Linkwitz-Riley which means the tweeter does "sing" in -12 dB at 3 kHz!

My supertweeter FOSTEX T925A covers ca. 8.8 kHz - 25 kHz again with the low-side high-pass mild about -15 dB/Oct which means the supertweeter does "sing" in -15 dB at 4 kHz!

Therefore, I fully agree with @617's point of "run such hf augmentation above 5khz or so". Furthermore, I have implemented safe and flexible independent relative gain controls for tweeters and supertweeters (and of course for midrange-Beryllium-domes, woofers and subwoofers).

These Fq coverage measurements were intensively shared on my project thread, e.g. in my post #485.
The typical (line-level and) SP-high-level Fq coverages were measured like in these three diagrams;

Then, I measured the actual room air sound at my listening position in detail using a excelently-flat-response measurement microphone;

Consequently and apparently, my (and @617's) arguments on tweeters and supertweeters are in the Fq range of about 3.5 kHz to 22 kHz.

And, the implementation of the safe and flexible relative gain control for supertweeters (and tweeters, if needed) was intensively discussed and shared in my posts #643 and #644, as typically represented by this diagram 'you would please carefully read my post #643);

BTW, I have -48 dB/Oct low-pass (high-cut) filters at 25 kHz mainly to cut-off (shut-down) UHF (ultra high frequency) noises often included in poorly QC-ed HiRes music tracks especially in DSD format. The rationales can be found in my post #532.


As for @617's another important point of "I would experiment with running the supertweeter at an elevated level (perhaps up to +10db) but pointed towards the rear of the room, directly at a very hard surface, perhaps stone or glass. I think getting as much of this energy bouncing around the room would serve to create ambience.", I will write separately in my next post here relating to my audio setup and listening room acoustics, hopefully late today.

 

[voodooless]

I would not call this setup a traditional super tweeter setup, it's simply a properly filtered 3-way that happens to have a tweeter with a relatively high x-over frequency. That is rather different from slapping another tweeter on top of your existing speaker, calling it "super", and then thinking it will sound better .

 

[dualazmak]

I would not call this setup a traditional super tweeter setup, it's simply a properly filtered 3-way that happens to have a tweeter with a relatively high x-over frequency. That is rather different from slapping another tweeter on top of your existing speaker, calling it "super", and then thinking it will sound better .

Even though I essentially agree with what you mean, I actually do use FOSTEX Supertweeter T925A in around 4 kHz to 25 kHz together with Beryllium dome tweeters... Yes, my usage/utilization of T925A would not be "traditional"...

 

[voodooless]

Even though I essentially agree with what you mean, I actually do use FOSTEX Supertweeter T925A in around 4 kHz to 25 kHz together with Beryllium dome tweeters...

Sure, that's fine, as long as you properly filter both the low and high sides and do a decent integration, there is no issue. These are often used in combination with 2" exit horn drivers to cover the last octaves properly, but your use case is equally valid.

 

[dualazmak]

Sure, that's fine, as long as you properly filter both the low and high sides and do a decent integration, there is no issue. These are often used in combination with 2" exit horn drivers to cover the last octaves properly, but your use case is equally valid.

Thank you, yes FOSTEX T925A (ref. here #485) is also still an excellent highly-efficient heavy metal horn supertweeter to cover last octaves.

And I know well the setup of Greg Timbers using "reasonable and budget" Pioneer Elite A-20 amplifier for compression drivers (super tweeters) in his extraordinary expensive multichannel stereo system with JBL Everest DD67000 which he himself designed and developed (ref. #435).

 

[ZolaIII]

Thank you, yes FOSTEX T925A (ref. here #485) is also still an excellent highly-efficient heavy metal horn supertweeter to cover last octaves.

And I know well the setup of Greg Timbers using "reasonable and budget" Pioneer Elite A-20 amplifier for compression drivers (super tweeters) in his extraordinary expensive multichannel stereo system with JBL Everest DD67000 which he himself designed and developed (ref. #435).

I would put Foster (T925A) crossover point a KHz higher as recommended and if you need with background support 12 dB per octave but I don't think you do and far from it that Yamaha berilium tweater gets narrow at that point.

Specifications of FOSTEX T925A FOSTEX

 

[dualazmak]

I would put Foster (T925A) crossover point a KHz higher as recommended and if you need with background support 12 dB per octave but I don't think you do and far from it that Yamaha berilium tweater gets narrow at that point.

Specifications of FOSTEX T925A FOSTEX

Even though I understand your feeling "in general" or "in theoretical sense", I believe our utilization/usage of supertweeters is greatly dependent to personal preferences, other SP drivers, total audio setup including amplifiers and relative gains, our listening room acoustics/environments, and so on...

The "personal" optimal utilization would vary person to person, audiophile to audiophile, just like I described my case in above my posts as well as I will share in my next post to be written very soon, hopefully within a few hours.

 

[ZolaIII]

Even though I understand your feeling "in general" or "in theoretical sense", I believe our utilization/usage of supertweeters is greatly dependent to personal preferences, other SP drivers, total audio setup including amplifiers and relative gains, our listening room acoustics/environments, and so on...

The "personal" optimal utilization would vary person to person, audiophile to audiophile, just like I described my case in above my posts as well as I will share in my next post to be written very soon, hopefully within a few hours.

Physical properties what specific driver can do and does the best are only determined by those properties and it's never good to push them what they can't or do less satisfying. And please Foster OEM - Fostex front commercial distribution/sale end and no roouth anymore unfortunate (Onkyo). Other than that do as you wish.

 

[dualazmak]

Physical properties what specific driver can do and does the best are only determined by those properties and it's never good to push them what they can't or do less satisfying. And please Foster OEM - Fostex front commercial distribution/sale end and no roouth anymore unfortunate (Onkyo). Other than that do as you wish.

Sorry, but I do not fully understand what would be your points. Would you please carefully read my above post #50?

As I shared here #485, at least in Japan, FOSTEX T925A is still commercially available, on catalogue and on sale, fortunately.
https://www.fostex.jp/products/t925a/

Edit: Also internationally available:
https://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_components/HornTweeters.shtml
https://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_components/pdf/t925arev.pdf

And I believe my utilization of T925A is well within its specification; 5 kHz - 40 kHz, 108 dB/W (1m), recommended XO is above 6 kHz -12 dB/Oct;
I use it with XO at ca. 8.8 kHz -15 dB/Oct (with DSP EKIO's XO plus 3.0 microF + 10.0 microF series capacitors) (ref. #485 and #890).

 

[dualazmak]

In any way, please let me go back to @617's another important point of "I would experiment with running the supertweeter at an elevated level (perhaps up to +10db) but pointed towards the rear of the room, directly at a very hard surface, perhaps stone or glass. I think getting as much of this energy bouncing around the room would serve to create ambience."

Since I can very easily flexibly physically align the position, direction, and relative gain of FOSTEX T925A, I am very much interested in testing/evaluating this suggestion of higher gain operation with a very hard-material random surface sound reflectors in odd directions. I would like to find heavy random surface marble stone plate or similar sound reflection/dispersing material. If this would become my real experiments in the near future, I will share in detail on my project thread with a notice on this thread also.

BTW, even with my present SP and listening position setup, I have very stable and rather wide 3D sweet-spot space. The excellent soundstage remain unchanged even if I move 1 m 3D (left-right, front-rear, up-down) from my central listening position. This means I and my wife can well enjoy the excellent sound and soundstage sitting together on the listening sofa.

My SP-LP alignment is not in equilateral triangle, but it is in isosceles triangle shown in this photo/diagram.

The SP system is not toe-in towards my ears, but intentionally set parallel with side wall and the large windows. The supertweeters, FOSTEX T925A, are in faintly toe-in targeting to my head, though.

Furthermore, the furniture and amp board alignments are very much asymmetrical; I have nice open space, actually our dining room, between L&R SPs, and I also have nice "acoustically dead" Japanese style tatami-floor room behind my listening position. Please refer to here #687 for the details.
- Not only the precision (0.1 msec level) time alignment over all the SP drivers but also SP facing directions and sound-deadening space behind the SPs plus behind our listening position would be critically important for effective (perfect?) disappearance of speakers: #687

I assume, therefore, the asymmetrical random-odd-furniture listening room acoustics might non-intentionally and partly achieving the above point of @617.


To finish my present postings on this thread, please let me again share the followings for your possible interests.
I have also started these two threads relating to "Audio Reference/Sampler Musics Playlist"; your visits and participation will be much welcome.
- Music for Testing Treble (High Frequency) Sound
and
- An Attempt Sharing Reference Quality Music Playlist: at least a portion and/or whole track being analyzed by 3D color spectrum of Adobe Audition

 

[617]

Most very high frequency signal is going to be correlated to instruments or other sounds in the recording - in other words, there is no sound source which has fundamentals that high. As a result, adding harmonic distortion could increase the high frequency content of the recording to 'fill out' that top octave to 20khz (and beyond). This may be a good way to create a sense of air and ambience which, while synthetic, could be quite pleasant.

Keep in mind that many of the challenges of reproducing the top 2 octaves also apply to recording. Microphones are directional, and the very high frequency content captured will be proportional to the amount of indirect sound, which in an absorbent room will lack very high frequencies since rooms eat them far more efficiently than mids and bass. As a result, just as our speakers are 'dark' since they transition from omni to laser beams in the treble, our recordings are 'dark', since the mics are similarly directive, and operate in rooms which are essentially low pass filters.

Does this mean the mics don't capture what we hear? I don't really know, but I do know that I've never read an interview with a producer or recording engineer who said they didn't make subjective choices about tonality, or for that matter, any other aspect of the sound. Indeed, that seems to be most of what they're doing. We should enjoy the same license in reproduction.