D-Art vs Dome tweeters

[Volutrik]

How do these compare? What are your opinions? (Adam vs Kali)

I've seen that ribbon tweeters are flatter, have faster transient response and are less fatiguing. But, ironically, I've heard people saying that ribbon tweeters are more fatiguing than dome tweeters.

 

[VMAT4]

I really liked my Adam T7V monitors and don't regret upgrading to the T8V monitors. I had Kali LP6 monitors and had nothing to complain about with them. But everybody is different. You need to audition the the monitors you're interested in if you're worried about fatigue. I've heard good and bad ribbon tweeters. The GoldenEar ribbon tweeters sounded awful to me while Emotiva and Adam tweeters sound great to me.

 

[dfuller]

Okay, first off:
Adam uses AMTs, not ribbons. They work on a different principle - rather like a bellows, rather than like a ribbon's back-and-forth movement (a ribbon is just a weird version of a dynamic driver, ultimately).

AMTs are in most respects not as good as a good dome. They're larger so they beam earlier, and they tend to be a bit less linear in terms of distortion. As far as I care, they don't offer any meaningful benefits - high sensitivity doesn't matter when you need to match it to a lower sensitivity woofer and basically have to dump power (passive) or drop the gain (active) a bunch.

 

[MarkS]

And "faster transient response" is an old audio myth that just won't die.

 

[kyuu]

After using the Adam D3V for a while, I don't think the AMTs have any particular advantage. They are fine for the application, I like the speakers. But I haven't heard any of the supposed advantages versus domes.

 

[DavidMcRoy]

Okay, first off:
Adam uses AMTs, not ribbons. They work on a different principle - rather like a bellows, rather than like a ribbon's back-and-forth movement (a ribbon is just a weird version of a dynamic driver, ultimately).

AMTs are in most respects not as good as a good dome. They're larger so they beam earlier, and they tend to be a bit less linear in terms of distortion. As far as I care, they don't offer any meaningful benefits - high sensitivity doesn't matter when you need to match it to a lower sensitivity woofer and basically have to dump power (passive) or drop the gain (active) a bunch.

I have never seen any evidence indicating that AMTs "tend to be a bit less linear in terms of distortion" than a dome.

 

[dfuller]

I have never seen any evidence indicating that AMTs "tend to be a bit less linear in terms of distortion" than a dome.

My evidence is based on the data I've seen from various sources (here, EAC, S+R).

 

[DavidMcRoy]

My evidence is based on the data I've seen from various sources (here, EAC, S+R).

What are EAC and S+R? Can you provide links, please?

 

[007Shorty]

Okay, first off:
Adam uses AMTs, not ribbons. They work on a different principle - rather like a bellows, rather than like a ribbon's back-and-forth movement (a ribbon is just a weird version of a dynamic driver, ultimately).

AMTs are in most respects not as good as a good dome. They're larger so they beam earlier, and they tend to be a bit less linear in terms of distortion. As far as I care, they don't offer any meaningful benefits - high sensitivity doesn't matter when you need to match it to a lower sensitivity woofer and basically have to dump power (passive) or drop the gain (active) a bunch.

And: AMTs have higher crossover frequencies compared to (most) domes. I prefer x-overs below 2 khz. I don't think you can do that with ribbons or AMTs.