Full Range Speakers, under $5k

[direstraitsfan98]

How were you planning to do bass management. Despite the usually enumerated advantages of 2 subs, I believe that unless you want a really large sweet spot, a good single sub will do the job often enough that most should start with one and only buy another if they really need it.

From my experience two subs are easier to integrate in the room. Having two helps to lesson the effect of peaks and nulls. Combined with some sort of bass management like say an AVR, you’re good to go. You’ll actually get better measured performance with such a system then mine probably. I don’t run any EQ or bass management.

 

[Ron Texas]

From my experience two subs are easier to integrate in the room. Having two helps to lesson the effect of peaks and nulls. Combined with some sort of bass management like say an AVR, you’re good to go. You’ll actually get better measured performance with such a system then mine probably. I don’t run any EQ or bass management.

We could go on forever on this two vs one thing. I suggest you try bass management and EQ before reaching any conclusion.

 

[617]

Ribbon, planar and AMT tweeters all measure worse than good dome tweeters of similar cost. They invariably have narrower dispersion due to their large size - sometimes much larger size - and have far greater distortion in the 2-4 kHz range which is where tweeter performance really matters.

The RAAL tweeters are generally the exception to the rule and many people regard them as the best tweeters available, but their narrow vertical and comparatively narrow horizontal dispersion is something that has to be accounted for. The bigger AMTs can be pretty good too.

However, if you're looking for state of the art distortion and dispersion, modern hard dome (corundum, beryllium, aluminum) tweeters are generally where it's at, especially if they are loaded in shallow wave guides.

Having said all that, people do like the way ribbons and AMTs sound, and consumers seem to like buying them. Some of the really expensive RAALs have super low distortion, and their frequency response is incredibly linear.

You can see some measurements here if interested:

https://hificompass.com/en/reviews/bliesma-t34b-4-beryllium-dome-tweeter high end large dome tweeter
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/raal/raal-70-20xr medium sized RAAL
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/dayton-audio/dayton-audio-amtpro-4 large AMT
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/sbacoustics/sb-acoustics-sb26adc-c000-4 inexpensive aluminum dome tweeter - I suspect a variant of this is used in the Revel speakers you're looking at? The new version of this tweeter is ceramic coated and I suspect the breakup is pushed even higher now.
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/peerless/peerless-da25bg08-06 very inexpensive (seen them for $15) aluminum dome


See below graphs. Tweeter performance is a bit like DACs in the sense that for very little money you can approach state of the art performance if conventional, optimized technology is being used. If you feel there is some magic in an alternate approach, you can spend a lot more money to get slightly worse overall performance which may be optimized in one or two ways.

 

[MZKM]

Ribbon, planar and AMT tweeters all measure worse than good dome tweeters of similar cost. They invariably have narrower dispersion due to their large size - sometimes much larger size - and have far greater distortion in the 2-4 kHz range which is where tweeter performance really matters.

The RAAL tweeters are generally the exception to the rule and many people regard them as the best tweeters available, but their narrow vertical and comparatively narrow horizontal dispersion is something that has to be accounted for. The bigger AMTs can be pretty good too.

However, if you're looking for state of the art distortion and dispersion, modern hard dome (corundum, beryllium, aluminum) tweeters are generally where it's at, especially if they are loaded in shallow wave guides.

Having said all that, people do like the way ribbons and AMTs sound, and consumers seem to like buying them. Some of the really expensive RAALs have super low distortion, and their frequency response is incredibly linear.

You can see some measurements here if interested:

https://hificompass.com/en/reviews/bliesma-t34b-4-beryllium-dome-tweeter high end large dome tweeter
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/raal/raal-70-20xr medium sized RAAL
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/dayton-audio/dayton-audio-amtpro-4 large AMT
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/sbacoustics/sb-acoustics-sb26adc-c000-4 inexpensive aluminum dome tweeter - I suspect a variant of this is used in the Revel speakers you're looking at? The new version of this tweeter is ceramic coated and I suspect the breakup is pushed even higher now.
https://hificompass.com/en/speakers/measurements/peerless/peerless-da25bg08-06 very inexpensive (seen them for $15) aluminum dome


See below graphs. Tweeter performance is a bit like DACs in the sense that for very little money you can approach state of the art performance if conventional, optimized technology is being used. If you feel there is some magic in an alternate approach, you can spend a lot more money to get slightly worse overall performance which may be optimized in one or two ways.

View attachment 34915

The measurements for this ~$25 Peerless tweeter is truly amazing for the price, in terms of distortion, dispersion, linearity, SPL, etc. What truly stumps me is that their more expensive models are generally not as well rounded.

 

[617]

The measurements for this ~$25 Peerless tweeter is truly amazing for the price, in terms of distortion, dispersion, linearity, SPL, etc. What truly stumps me is that their more expensive models are generally not as well rounded.

Yeah, that peerless tweeter is one of the highest value tweeters available. Peerless has been making some outstanding products in recent years; the ne123 midranges, corundum tweeters, some amazing compression drivers too.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

The measurements for this ~$25 Peerless tweeter is truly amazing for the price, in terms of distortion, dispersion, linearity, SPL, etc. What truly stumps me is that their more expensive models are generally not as well rounded.

Are they not domes?

 

[617]

Are they not domes?

I haven't seen really detailed measurements of their corundum domes, but I would expect the 32mm to have outstanding distortion at low frequencies. These large domes are popular with some designers (Chario comes to mind?) because they allow smooth transition between a midrange using a LR2 filter. Not quite as good as a waveguide, but the audio world isn't 100% sold on waveguides.

https://www.parts-express.com/peerless-da25tx00-08-1-corundum-dome-tweeter--264-1676
https://www.parts-express.com/peerless-da32tx00-08-1-1-4-corundum-dome-tweeter--264-1678

I think these are their most costly HF units at 53-65 dollars. Pretty incredible given the similarities to the Transducer Lab units:
http://transducerlab.com/index.php?pag=pro&p=l&c=Oxide+Dome+Tweeters

Not sure if any of these have made their way into any high end designs but a lot of DIYers consisder the Tlabs units to be the best ever.

 

[MZKM]

I haven't seen really detailed measurements of their corundum domes, but I would expect the 32mm to have outstanding distortion at low frequencies. These large domes are popular with some designers (Chario comes to mind?) because they allow smooth transition between a midrange using a LR2 filter. Not quite as good as a waveguide, but the audio world isn't 100% sold on waveguides.

https://www.parts-express.com/peerless-da25tx00-08-1-corundum-dome-tweeter--264-1676
https://www.parts-express.com/peerless-da32tx00-08-1-1-4-corundum-dome-tweeter--264-1678

I think these are their most costly HF units at 53-65 dollars. Pretty incredible given the similarities to the Transducer Lab units:
http://transducerlab.com/index.php?pag=pro&p=l&c=Oxide+Dome+Tweeters

Not sure if any of these have made their way into any high end designs but a lot of DIYers consisder the Tlabs units to be the best ever.

I think you missed his pun/dad joke.

 

[617]

I think you missed his pun/dad joke.

WELL PLAYED RUBINSON

 

[Ron Texas]

I prefer tweeters made from either unobtanium or conundrum.

 

[Laserjock]

Don’t take it out of convex...

Stay Focal..us’ed

 

[briskly]

You can see some measurements here if interested:

The passband sensitivity is quite different between the drivers. The graphs you pulled up vary from 88-98dB SPL.

Revel's Performa lines use custom variants of the SB Acoustics aluminium drivers (ADC/CDC tweeter, NAC/CAC cones), with and without the ceramic coating. The presence of alumina has not shifted the mode frequencies particularly.

 

[617]

The passband sensitivity is quite different between the drivers. The graphs you pulled up vary from 88-98dB SPL.

Revel's Performa lines use custom variants of the SB Acoustics aluminium drivers (ADC/CDC tweeter, NAC/CAC cones), with and without the ceramic coating. The presence of alumina has not shifted the mode frequencies particularly.

That's an interesting observation. Poor assumption on my part. Examining the FR of the CAC vs NAC woofers they look exactly the same. The CAC cones do look nice but I wonder where the differences show up. I can't imagine a ceramic coating increases damping. The CAC is 1/2db more efficient but that's almost meaningless.

Looks like the CAC adds half a gram to the Mms over the NAC woofer.

 

[eliash]

Last week, Danny Richie:

Can YOUR speakers be upgraded?

Just for info,
this is what I found as crossover in my Dynaudio Focus220 MK1 two-way speakers.
Even though rattling in the enclosure (I took them out into an external box, also to have space for a flatsteel 3Kg counterweight), the components (and the drivers as well) don´t look bad to me.
The tweeter coupling is really sophisticated. Just one electrolytic cap for impedance compensation, no ferrite.
The original enclosure though has (had) problems in mass and stability from my perspective...

 

[rgpit]

At $4995, the Spendor A7 is worth a listen. https://www.stereophile.com/content/spendor-a7-loudspeaker

 

[Ron Texas]

@Ron Texas The F206 and possibly F208 may not have enough low end for your requirements based on spins and predicted in-room response:

View attachment 34607

From: http://www.aes-media.org/sections/pnw/pnwrecaps/2014/solive_sep14/seattle_aes_sep18_2014 _headphone_talk.pdf

The graphic is labled "predicted in room response". What happened to room gain? I could be wrong, but there seems to be less bass than anechoic response.

 

[mitchco]

Ron, I believe the predicted in room response is intended to include room gain, but you would have to reach out to Sean Olive to confirm. The F208 was eq'd to add more bass to match the preferred in-room response as per Sean's research.

I know the ANSI/CTA 2034-A standard predicts in-room response down to 20 Hz but with the caveat: "At lower frequencies it is clear that the PIR cannot anticipate the effects of room modes and standing waves, although an underlying trend seems to be evident." If you look at Fig 11 on page 37 in the standard, you can see the predicted in room response and the actual measured in-room response. Pretty dang close...

Back to the F208, looking at the predicted in-room response, relative to 100 Hz it appears to be roughly -15 dB down at 20 Hz. Looking at an in-room response measurement here: https://www.avhub.com.au/product-reviews/hi-fi/revel-f-208-loudspeakers-review-test-512369 See graph 7. Also relative to 100 Hz, the response is -15 dB down at 20 Hz.

 

[nhunt]

Yeah, I actually got F206s and a pair of subs based on a lot of research and a similar budget. I found this:

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/revel-trifecta

The tests were divided into four sessions, two in the morning and two in the afternoon. The Performa3 F208 came in first in three of the four rounds; the F206 was last in all four. But there was a significant reason for the latter. The less extended bass of the smaller F206 was evident on many of the selections, which kept its scores down slightly. When I later suggested to Kevin Voecks that the F206 might have come in first if enhanced by a good subwoofer or two (from Revel, of course!), while the larger speakers remained sub-less, he agreed.
Read more at https://www.soundandvision.com/content/revel-trifecta#IH1bIxbpD8DqQtFc.99

I also found posters on avsforums that said that Kevin Voecks had given them similar advice about getting F206s (he posts there).

I am *super* happy with the combo. I eventually got a c208 and two M105s to complete a HT setup. YMMV!

 

[eliash]

@Krunok until consumers start demanding spinorama charts, not much is going to happen. I am writing an educational article on the ANSI/CTA 2034 Standard Method of Measurement for In-Home Loudspeakers for awareness that one can download for free here: https://www.cta.tech/Research-Standards/Standards.aspx?search=2034

The only place I know that is curating a catalog of spins is: https://speakerdata2034.blogspot.com/

Thanks for mentioning Floyd Toole´s research

Funny thing about distortion is that we care so much of it in the front line of our chain (DACs, preamps, amps) but at the very end of the chain, where one would expect the distortions to matter most (as it is in the range of 0.1%-0.5% even for very good speakers) it seems that it is simply not the case.

Again I remember the fact that Toole's 500 pages book has only 2 pages about speakers distortion and the conclusion is pretty much this:

"In the general population of consumer loudspeakers, it has been very rare for distortion to be identified as a factor in the overall subjective ratings. This is not because distortion is not there or is not measurable, but it is low enough that it is not an obvious factor in judgments of sound quality at normal foreground listening levels."

Thanks as well for mentioning Floyd Toole´s book "Sound reproduction".
It looks like a great read to me, filling up some gaps in lsp knowledge...

 

[Ron Texas]

Ron, I believe the predicted in room response is intended to include room gain, but you would have to reach out to Sean Olive to confirm. The F208 was eq'd to add more bass to match the preferred in-room response as per Sean's research.

I know the ANSI/CTA 2034-A standard predicts in-room response down to 20 Hz but with the caveat: "At lower frequencies it is clear that the PIR cannot anticipate the effects of room modes and standing waves, although an underlying trend seems to be evident." If you look at Fig 11 on page 37 in the standard, you can see the predicted in room response and the actual measured in-room response. Pretty dang close...

Back to the F208, looking at the predicted in-room response, relative to 100 Hz it appears to be roughly -15 dB down at 20 Hz. Looking at an in-room response measurement here: https://www.avhub.com.au/product-reviews/hi-fi/revel-f-208-loudspeakers-review-test-512369 See graph 7. Also relative to 100 Hz, the response is -15 dB down at 20 Hz.

I get your point. Even with floor standing speakers subs are needed if one want's good solid bass all the way down. Unfortunately, integrating a sub isn't so easy. It might be easier with floor standers because a lower crossover point may be used and possibly the mains can be run full range. Time alignment remains difficult. It took me a long time to get everything right with my Dynamo 1000W & LS50's.

Possibly with something like Triton's the volume can be cranked up on the internal subs and the bumps eq'ed down...