RAAL Dipole 140-15D, and other dipole tweeter options

JohnR · « **on:** 29 Mar 2011, 12:22 pm »

I've been wondering about the next step up from the Neo3. One option I've considered is more of them. However I'm not at all sure that will really be a worthwhile spend.

I noticed a couple of days ago that Raal have turned the 140-15D into a full dipole. I was wondering perchance if anyone here has heard them. This doesn't seem to actually be on the Raal site so here are the specs on Madisound: https://www.madisound.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=9035

Cost is substantially higher than the Neo3. However I'm not finding anything much in-between. The Heil dipole gets a bad rap for build quality which does make me nervous.

Any thoughts or other options appreciated (well, except for the troll brigade that we don't seem to be able to get away from).

Thanks

JoshK · « **Reply #1 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 01:07 pm »

I've yet to come across reviews of the RAAL dipole. I know the standard RAAL is very popular and reviews I've read put it well above the NEO3, Heil and other AMTs (like Beyma).

I'd really like to hear one of the RAALs someday. They are however a substantial investment.

JohnR · « **Reply #2 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 01:11 pm »

Thanks Josh - sounds like we're in the same boat.

Zu Audio —Sean · « **Reply #3 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 01:32 pm »

I dig Alex's standard ribbons. No reports on the new dipoles yet, but I did hear the first version which had symmetric horns integrated. Excellent treble, usable from 5k and up. If you want high SPL from the system that uses them you will likely need to run 4th order and maybe bump the filter point up. If that, and their dispersion characteristics fit your design parameters I would give them a go. Also, unprotected ribbon dipoles will rip from plosives and wind.

AMTs are much tougher but totally different. These can generally be used much lower in the spectrum and can generate very high SPLs.

TomS · « **Reply #4 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 01:44 pm »

I think Bill Baker had those in the Purity Audio room at RMAF last year, tacked on top of the Rethm speakers, but unfortunately I didn't get a chance to hear them.

JoshK · « **Reply #5 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 02:13 pm »

Yeah, I'd worry about the fragility of dipole ribbons. I've heard of folks tearing dipole ribbons (not-RAAL's) from closing the door too hard.

arthurs · « **Reply #6 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 02:36 pm »

Quote from: TomS on 29 Mar 2011, 01:44 pm

I think Bill Baker had those in the Purity Audio room at RMAF last year, tacked on top of the Rethm speakers, but unfortunately I didn't get a chance to hear them.

Bill or Joe can weigh in here as well, but I thought the RAAL di-poles absolutely transformed the Rethm's and the room at RMAF....fantastic sound...

JohnR · « **Reply #7 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 02:41 pm »

I'd be using them (or whatever the driver ends up being, if anything) as a designed-in element of the speaker rather than an add-on afterthought.

arthurs · « **Reply #8 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 02:47 pm »

Understood John, but I think it would still be a fantastic tweeter in that orientation as well. I was speaking to the opportunity I had to listen to them at length, not recommending they be used as an add-on. You might give Alex at RAAL a call, he obviously could shed much more light on his thoughts on implementing and the performance of the tweeters themselves than most could...

Nyal Mellor · « **Reply #9 on:** 29 Mar 2011, 10:05 pm »

I spoke to someone on the phone the other day who was using a RAAL in a non-dipole setup and said it was wonderful. I imagine the same qualities would extend to the dipole.

Only issue I would see would be integration with a midrange. I think that you'd need to go to smaller than a 6.5 to get a good directivity match at crossover. A bit like what JohnK did with his new speakers. Or else try a BG 8 / 10.

hum4god · « **Reply #10 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 04:26 am »

there are other options between neo3 and RAAL that i personally like even better then the RAAL dipole because they are less expensive , high efficient, and with lower extension.

there are a few AMT drivers that can be run without back , fully dipole.
Mundorf comes to mind . i use a beyma TPL150.
they can be crossed over lower then the RAAL , most of them around 1000 or 1500hz.

there is one special new AMT that just emerged and is still in development by Hawthorne audio ,
they are coming out with an AMT with horn that is highly efficient , over 100db , and can play down to 500hz which makes it a mid/tweeter.
with this driver you might not need a mid driver .
here is a link about the hawthorne driver:

http://www.hawthorneaudio.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3850

JoshK · « **Reply #11 on:** 15 Apr 2011, 05:38 pm »

I didn't read that whole thread, but it didn't sound like they were going to offer the driver by itself, or did I read that wrong.

JohnR · « **Reply #12 on:** 17 Apr 2011, 08:37 am »

Quote from: JoshK on 15 Apr 2011, 05:38 pm

I didn't read that whole thread, but it didn't sound like they were going to offer the driver by itself, or did I read that wrong.

I think he said somewhere that they would be offered standalone after they already had complete systems using it developed and out in the field. (My short summary of what I read from Darrel). So I wouldn't hold my breath.

Quote from: hum4god on 30 Mar 2011, 04:26 am

Mundorf comes to mind . i use a beyma TPL150.

Thanks, that's one to look into. It's still a big jump (in price) from the Neo3.... I'm trying to assess at this point where the biggest fish are.

versus rider · « **Reply #13 on:** 18 Nov 2011, 02:49 pm »

I am looking at the non dipole ribbon to work with my open baffle woofers and 200Hz tractrix horn. This may sound stupid but what is the point of a dipole, I thought the dipole effect that comes with open baffle cancels out ( to a certain extent ) the sound from the front of the driver.

Rocket_Ronny · « **Reply #14 on:** 18 Nov 2011, 04:33 pm »

Quote

I've yet to come across reviews of the RAAL dipole. I know the standard RAAL is very popular and reviews I've read put it well above the NEO3, Heil and other AMTs (like Beyma).

Can you point us to any reivews Josh?

Quote

AMTs are much tougher but totally different. These can generally be used much lower in the spectrum and can generate very high SPLs.

Can you share any sonic differences between the AMTs and RAALs Sean?

Hawthorne is planning to use their unique AMT driver in their Reference series of speakers. So no off the shelf drivers.

Rocket_Ronny

studiotech · « **Reply #15 on:** 19 Nov 2011, 03:31 am »

I've got direct experience with both the TPL-150(used in standard closed back mode) and the Raal 140-15. I have to say that IMHO, the Raal wins for an airy effortless, almost floating sound. Not really sure how to describe it. The TPL is great where high SPL is needed and a more robust driver for applications like large studio monitors or even PA systems. We never tried the TPL with the back removed for obvious reasons, but others report even better performance.

We used the TPLs for our studio monitors after trying the Fountek Neopro5 and not liking it and also a Beyma380 compression driver on a waveguide. I tend to like my tweeters crossed higher than some. Not sure if I'm extra picky or what, but we have the TPL set at a 1.8KHz 24/oct slope and I don't like it any lower than that. Other people using the version with the horn, are running down closer to 1KHz.

For my home set-up, I am currently crossing the Raal at around 3KHz.

Anyone wanna be brave and go for the dipole Raal? I've not tried it or even heard it yet, but Alexander does nothing half-assed, so you know it will be the best he could do. I'm placing an order with Alexander soon and might be able to help one of you guys get a pair for a fair price. Serious inquiries only....

hndaaudio · « **Reply #16 on:** 20 Nov 2011, 09:34 am »

Studiotech, What was it you did not like about the Beyma 380 ?

studiotech · « **Reply #17 on:** 22 Nov 2011, 09:45 pm »

In all honesty, it was probably more our waveguide implementation that bothered me the most. It had that "hands cupped over you mouth" sounds more matter what we tried. Also, I feel that most compression driver set-ups loose a little something in the upper octave. They never have that airy extension that ribbons can have. I wanted to do something a little different than most main monitors to which seem to usually have a large compression driver on an old style horn. Boring....

Greg

Sjef · « **Reply #18 on:** 30 Nov 2011, 11:10 pm »

I have not heard the RAAL dipole tweeter but I used to have a pair of the RAAL 140-15D ribbons wich I have sold lately. It seems that I'm about the only one on this planet that didn't like them much, too sterile for me. They have a typical "high end" sound wich I do not like. They can sound superb on some recordings but also very boring others while every time I switched back to my small ess air motion transformers everything sounded so much more interesting, music came alive literally. I can play my entire record collection trough them without ever being anoyed by the sound. With the RAAL's I skipped a lot of albums. That's a bad sign for me. BTW the small AMT are much better then the big ones imho. The big ones have one negative thing in common with the RAAL's wich is bad vertical dispersion, even with the foam pads. The big ESS AMT also lack top end, same for the Beyma AMT's wich I had on trial for a couple of days. That why the Raal sounds as having more air. Personally I would not use the Big ESS or the Beyma anywhere lower then 3kHz

The RAAL'sare too thin most of the time or as Romy the Cat described them as having a colour palet of destilled water. Lynn Olson described them as sounding like plasma tweeters. Point is, I also happen to dislike plasma tweeters for the very same reason of lacking mass and body and tone colour, wich is another thing as colouration btw. The Raals do sound best when used above 8kHz imho. They do not match my Phy-Hp midrange very well. Tried them with some PHL 1220 midrange, wich is a better match but still. They lack fless and blood like a lot of ribbons do.

I really tried to like the RAAL's and on some occasions they do sound way better then the AMT's but in 90% of the time I get so much more satisfaction with the AMT that in the end I have sold the RAAL's

What I'm trying to say is that the RAALs are not the holey grail. They are good in some applications for sure, just not my cup of tea. But then again, it seems I'm the only one on this planet on this.

face · « **Reply #19 on:** 3 Dec 2011, 01:49 am »

What were you using for a crossover? I'm surprised you enjoyed the sound of the ESS more as it has higher distortion from what I remember.