[tboling]

I was curious what speakers you all might have that have aluminum dome drivers. I did some comparisons with paper/kevlar cones at a local store, and some I could tell were better, some weren't. Are there inherent benefits, like frequency response or reduced noise, in using dome drivers?

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

i have a set of sony speakers from a mini system that have either au or mylar drivers and they are over heavy on the bass

 

[cpu8088]

am using vifa aluminium dome tweeters http://www.scan-speak.dk/vifa/


they are good needs at least 100 hours burn in but then no big difference from soft dom tweeter

 

[Bigus]

Aluminum and other stiff cone materials (magnesium, ceramic, some carbon composites) used in midrange drivers have the advantages of reduced stored energy, lower non-linear distortions, and frequency response that extends higher before cone breakup begins. They have the disadvantage of a really nasty breakup mode when it does occur, which usually requires a more complex crossover network (either higher order or a notch filter, or both). Accuracy is good, cost is typically high. When used for tweeters it seems to be a toss-up. Extended frequency response and typically greater power handling (easier to dissipate heat, I suppose), but sometimes the reverse of midranges in that they have higher stored energy. I haven't spent the time yet to figure out why that reversal of behavior.

 

[Xcalibur_255]

In the case of Infinity's Ceramic/Aluminum hybrid transducers, the Infinity website has some .pdf downloadable white papers written by Dr. Floyd Toole that are an interesting read. There are other white papers which cover some good topics as well.

 

[PewterTA]

I have twin aluminum cone drivers on my B&W DM604 S3s...it's definitely....a little bit of a different sound for the low end reproduction. Takes a little bit getting used to. I don't know how to explain it, maybe like Bigus said, they are very accurate with sounds. Now that I'm used to them, I really really like them, but I won't lie that the first three weeks or so I thought they had NO bass what so ever and I actually liked my DM602 S3s with the Kevlar woofer driver better... They are very accurate would be the only word I know for the difference.

 

[Paul Scarpelli]

The actually cone material has less to do with the speaker's overall sound than the design of the product, and infinitely less to do with the sound than the room acoustics. For example, the cheapest and worst speaker cones are paper. But, some of the best and most expensive speaker cones are paper; Scan-Speak, for example. Many times a come material is picked for marketing reasons, low price, or strictly for appearance. Be careful. I would trust respected companies like B&W, Dynaudio, etc. for picking cone materials that best serve accuracy and reliability.


I've owned high-end road bicycle frames made of carbon fiber, steel, aluminum, and titanium, and I must say the geometry, build quality and the components have always made 95% of the difference; not the frame material.


Never owned a paper bike, though...

 

[mobius]

But, some of the best and most expensive speaker cones are paper; Scan-Speak, for example.


Yes, but aren't their better measuring drivers (18W/8545K00), made of a paper/carbon fiber pulp? I think that's what Linkwitz measured anyway. It basically came down to the 8545K and the Seas W18EX001 or W22EX-001 (I think) within the confines of open baffle measurement.


Your point is well taken. However, if I were starting from scratch I would want to use the best designs utilizing the best materials.


BTW, how do you think Triad's in-walls stack up against your own in-room and other companies' in-room speakers? Do you think there is a compromise in SQ, or can in-wall speakers be designed to compete with in-room speakers?


I have my own opinion but I'd like to hear yours.

 

[maple leafs]

After auditioning many speakers lately, I found those with aluminum tweeters had a generally harsher treble but were on average more detailed.


Two very well respected companies use metal. Harbeth (aluminum) and Aerial (titanium). Did not listen to these two.

 

[rosconey]

the alum domes in my deftechs are ear bleeders, the alum domes in my machaura m55 are sweet and smooth,its how they are implimented-not by price

 

[Paul Scarpelli]

Quote:

BTW, how do you think Triad's in-walls stack up against your own in-room and other companies' in-room speakers? Do you think there is a compromise in SQ, or can in-wall speakers be designed to compete with in-room speakers? I have my own opinion but I'd like to hear yours.

Uh-oh...I smell a set-up... (Kidding...it's a valid question.)


First of all, when I use the term "paper cones" I am refering to any of the paper/carbon/wood pulp materials.


To answer The Loaded Question, now...


Our InWall and InRoom speakers use identical driver components, the same MDF cabinet material and bracing, the same internal enclosure volume, and the same crossover, tweaked to eliminate the 2 dB elevation from roughly 100 Hz to 300 Hz from the boundary effect of in-wall installation. In almost all applications, they sound very, very close, if not identical to each other. The only real physical difference is the grill material on the InWall, which is a very transparent expanded metal that works just as well as our cloth grills. We offer around twenty InWall and InCeiling versions of our InRoom speakers so people who prefer to use or must use InWall speakers can do so with little or no compromise.

 

[Paul Scarpelli]

In the early '90s, Forum member Charles Wood and I worked with John Dunleavy on the original Fosgate Audionics Home Theater System, which contained the Model Three processor, 4100 amplifiers, and fronts, surrounds, and subs. John showed me pulse response graphs of many different tweeters, and cloth dome tweeters were a bit slower in initial response, but they had much, much less ringing than most metal dome tweeters. Less ringing meant a more relaxed, less strident sound. John prefered Dynaudio drivers until he turned to Morel in the '90s, and he always maintained the superiority of cloth dome tweeters for their lack of ringing and better damping of resonance. Since then, I have heard a few metal dome tweeters that sound excellent, though.

 

[BobL]

Just a side note. Many recording studios use wall or soffit mounted monitors that are mounted flush with the wall. Basically an inwall speaker. Acousticians say the benefits are it eliminates edge diffraction so the midrange is smoother, eliminates cancellation reflections from the wall behind the monitor, and acoustical loading is increased so the monitor can more easily handle the low frequencies.


But, they also construct the wall to be slightly absorptive to compensate for the very solid walls with acoustical loading. As well as the wall construction is quite different than from the average home. Also the mounting techniques differ from most inwalls. And most pro monitors have some type of control to compensate for the boundary effect similar to Triads crossovers.


I'm not an expert on studios, so if someone has more to contribute or correct me please do so. But, as Paul stated I don't think you give up much if anything using inwalls installed correctly.


Bob

 

[mobius]

Uh-oh...I smell a set-up...


HeHe, no setup.


I haven't had a lot of opportunities to hear well-done in-wall applications; but my opinion jibes with what you're saying. If I remember correctly, many of ATC's excellent monitors are built to be used in-wall as well as in-room. Since they're active monitors, I suppose they have adjustable amp/x-over networks to account for in-wall placement.


Thanks for the reply.