-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
I need the communities Blessings
- Thread starter Sammy77
- Start date
You might be able to predict some typical flaws based on the measurements, or compatibility with the room in which they are meant to play, but particularly with 2-way speakers employing planar tweeters or AMT w/ waveguide, it is impossible to predict just from measurements how they will actually sound. This speaker category is always up for a surprise.
I am personally a bit reserved when it comes to such concepts (medium-sized midwoofer + planar/AMT tweeter), but if I had to recommend something similar, I would go for:
Radiant Clarity 6.2
These are very competently designed and were sounding surprisingly good, most likely to satisfy the OP´s expectations more than any concept with dome tweeter + waveguide.
MarkS
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,583
- Likes
- 2,423
50% over budget.
There is a smaller and more affordable alternative called Clarity 4.2.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 5,167
- Likes
- 4,109
Unless you are in the camp (as I am) that does not believe there is any magic in tweeter technology that goes beyond frequency response. But there is much marketing...
I am absolutely in the camp of not believing in any tweeter magic.
Nevertheless there is more to sound quality than frequency response. Particularly ribbon/planar tweeters and AMTs show significant differences to conventional domes in terms of directivity over frequency, diaphragm resonances (or lack thereof), diaphragm geometry, distortion, behavior in a compression environment/waveguide, recommended crossover points, slopes and as a matter of consequence lobing/interference, that all these factors constitute enough of reasons why the exact sound quality/characteristics, when combined with conventional midranges, differ from a dome tweeter of the very same frequency response, hence are not predictable.
I was not referring to that or claiming that they are anyhow superior by nature. Rather the opposite, they pose a lot of additional difficulties to any competent speaker designers, so many more can go wrong.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2024
- Messages
- 2,171
- Likes
- 3,667
Asides from directivity (which also covers lobing/interference), there doesn't seem to be any reason why any of those factors would not show up in the frequency response or how they should alter the sound independently of such. Perhaps an exception might be nonlinearities due to distortion at high SPL levels.
Multicore
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,979
- Likes
- 4,855
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 5,167
- Likes
- 4,109
Well that is part of the magic I was referring to. At least you didn't mention "speed"
Dr. Toole wrote that all of those characteristics are contained in and are represented by the frequency response plot.
I'm not saying that they will always be easy to pick out, and that there are other measures that may more easily show the differences, but the frequency response represents everything traveling through the air to your ears.
I dispute that, even if it would be written in the scripture. For the example of directivity it is easily understandable that a frequency response plot originating from a single point cannot represent the three-dimensional soundfield. Even a bunch of plots or a complex set like spinorama can only be valid for a spheric constellations of points, being just an approximation for other positions.
Imagine a ribbon or loosely suspended planar tweeter above breakup frequency acting as several diaphragm parts out of phase with each other at a given frequency. You really think that a single FR plot on axis does represent the sound characteristics fully? What would happen if you move the mic up a few centimeters towards the maximum of one of the partial resonances?
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 5,167
- Likes
- 4,109
Resonances for sure show in the frequency response.
And read the part of my last post that you didn't include in the quote.
AsciiLab sports a fantastic tweeter, which allows to tolerate al lot of the caveats raised against the 2-way route. Plus sub, I expect it to deliver substantial, but not beefy levels. The KEF R3 is another one, maybe more relaxed when going up in levels.Well that is part of the magic I was referring to. At least you didn't mention "speed"
Dr. Toole wrote that all of those characteristics are contained in and are represented by the frequency response plot.
I'm not saying that they will always be easy to pick out, and that there are other measures that may more easily show the differences, but the frequency response represents everything traveling through the air to your ears.
On AMTs, can't resist. The harmonica is its own suspension. Don't we expect break-up modes with that? Just saying ... and the insinuated "compression" trick won't work either
Try to bend a cardboard in lateral direction to the waves, and you know the answer.
Not necessarily, if they nicely add up at this point. Same with lobing.
Fun question off topic, basically: so you mean that the membrane is too stiff to be bent? How does it move then? Just kidding, AMTs are a lot about idealistic and incomplete thinking, as is also represented by the idea of squishing the air (depicted by a cherry kernel pressed between fingers). Like to discuss this topic in another thread?
Last edited:
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
Traces yes, but not how long they last or whether there are any nonlinear effects involved also. Likewise distortion doesn't show up in FR and it's pretty crucial.
Ascilab F6B and a sub.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 15,471
- Likes
- 34,857
That'll get one that ol' jump factor, all righty!
Holmz
Major Contributor
Similar threads
