[doug s.]

well, i have yust received an off-forum email from someone wery familiar w/both the criterion & the 626r.  he said their treble presentations couldn't be any more different.  so, regardless of whether or not the tweeters are the same, the implementation is obviously different...

doug s.

[Danny Richie]

well, i have yust received an off-forum email from someone wery familiar w/both the criterion & the 626r. he said their treble presentations couldn't be any more different. so, regardless of whether or not the tweeters are the same, the implementation is obviously different...

Yep, he is correct.

The treble in the 626R is handled nearly exclusively by the planar mid, and the ribbon is used as a super tweeter crossing at 10kHz.

They do sound very different. The speed and detail level of the ribbon far exceeds what the mid is capable of.

I've seen variations on this type of tweeter from four different manufacturers so it's very possible that it isn't made by Aurum Cantus;

It could be. If it is not then it is a perfect copy, and they will interchange.

I have measured the G2/G2si and these curves are almost identical.

I found the same.

[Rick Craig]

Thanks for the good question Rick,

I have now read the replies on the Audio Asylum and can't believe Brian is resorting to scaring people into thinking that my crossover design would damage a tweeter, plus threaten no warranty...

That is sad.

Here is the impedance response you asked for on the VMPS tweeter (no network).



As you can see an Fs of 250 Hz suggests that they can indeed easily handle covering the 1,700Hz to 40kHz range tha ...

As long as you use a fairly steep slope (which it looks like you did) then the ribbon won't have a problem with a 3.5K crossover point. The impedance curve makes it look like the FS is 250hz but this is actually due to the transformer (one reason why it almost dives to a dead short below 250hz). The slight blip around 1.7K is the true Fs - more difficult to pick up than say a 1" dome tweeter because the two behave very differently.

The ribbon will provide output below 2K but it's limited both thermally and mechanically below that area. That's why Brian has to cross it much higher because a shallow slope won't protect it very well from lower frequencies. These ribbons can also stretch with impedance tests running below 1K so I would suggest running curves from 1K to 20K to be safe.

Since Brian is an OEM then he may be able to import larger quantities direct from the manufacturer. Fountek is doing well despite the rumour mill; in fact, I just received yesterday an e-mail from them about a new ribbon that will be coming out soon  

[azryan]

"-it's limited both thermally and mechanically below that area.-"

That's what I was thinking myself.
Brian seemed to only look at the octave lower x-over point and ignore that it's a higher order slope.

Cleary it plain and simple has been proven to work as it's how GR's Lucidity line is designed, but he's saying that it WILL fail. Not even that is might fail if pushed too loud or might stretch out and degrade or anything.

Would you say that the redesign mod would be rated at a lower power handling by you than the stock one is rated?
Not that this would be a crime to have a lower power rating, but miht show simple design tradeoffs that have to be made??

I was wondering about brian's comments about the Gr mod's phase...

Do I have this right... the stock 626's electrical phase was all 1st order (which caused the big suck out in the top treble) and made all the driver perfectly in phase... BUT because the woofer's voice coil and true ribbon are both recessed physically vs. the surface output of the mid panel that the actual speaker output was not in perfect phase?

'If' that's right... part two....

Danny, you've flipped the electrical phase of the neo panel, but 'cuz the woofer and true ribbon are physically recessed does this make the total output all 'in-phase'?

I'm kinda thinking that neither design will be 'perfectly' in phase but what's the diff. of the speaker output phase of pre and post GR mod?

I know even brian admits that how you do it makes the speaker flatter and per your measurements... a LOT flatter.
[/quote]

[wshuff]

Thank you for that question.  I think that is what I wanted to know, too, but I couldn't articulate it.

[texasphile]

It is posted on the Critics Circle:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=11762.msg99660#99660

Chris

[Danny Richie]

First re-read info on page two and see if it makes sense.

Drivers can be electrically in phase or acoustically in phase and sometimes both.

Take two woofers side by side playing a 640Hz note. Wire one of them (electrically) 180 degrees out of phase from the other. They cancel each other out.

But move one back 21" (a time delay) and now they are acoustically in phase even though they are electrically out of phase.

I could flip the polarity on the mid in the new 626R network and they would all be electrically in phase but acoustically out of phase and there would be deep dips at both crossover points.

[_scotty_]

Question for Danny,What was the raw driver 1watt/1meter efficiency of the midrange and and tweeter in the 626r you modified. They were attenuated to level match the woofers output in the final frequency response graph of the modified speaker. I wondered how much attenuation was required. I also wondered what slopes were used on the tweeter and midrange and the  frequency of the woofer to midrange crossover in the original crossover circuit.Thanks,Scotty

[NealH]

Danny, have you taken any before and after impulse response plots - as done in most Stereophile speaker reviews?  I would be interested in seeing these as it will better point out phasing anomalies.

Now I realize that the audibility of small phase errors is debatable but, an impluse response plot would provide a pictorial point of reference.

[doug s.]

well, i have yust received an off-forum email from someone wery familiar w/both the criterion & the 626r. he said their treble presentations couldn't be any more different. so, regardless of whether or not the tweeters are the same, the implementation is obviously different...

Yep, he is correct.

The treble in the 626R is handled nearly exclusively by the planar mid, and the ribbon is used as a super tweeter crossing at 10kHz.

They do sound very different. The speed and detail level of the ribbon far exceeds what the mid is capable of.

this is interesting, except this fellow & myself had the same issues with the criterion - it was too soft in the treble, & lacking in detail.  while i have never heard the 626r, the guy told me that it is way more detailed in the treble, and not at all soft, while still being plenty smooth.

based upon the knowledge that the ribbons in the criterions i auditioned may have been damaged due to suction caused from removing the speakers from their plastic bags, & the fact that the crossovers of the diluceos were gonna be adjusted due to their using two midwoofs instead of the criterion's one, i jumped on your offer of a no-risk audition of the diluceos, where i wouldn't be responsible for shipping if i dint want them.  well, i think they're outstanding speakers in all respects - except for that softness & lack of detail in the treble.  otherwise, i'd be an owner.   i'd love to hear this design w/a hi-vi research ribbon tweet.

i yust do not like this tweeter, in this implementation.  mebbe as a supertweeter, or crossed over a bit higher, at 3.5k, as ya do w/the 626r's ya modded, the aurum cantus tweet would do better.  now, i know i'm in the minority here - a lot of folk rave about this tweet.  but, i know i'm not the only one w/my opinion - i've heard several comments about 'em similar to mine.  

so, bottom line?  listen for yerself, before buying, unless ya can get such an incredible deal on something used, that ya can turn it over w/out taking a hit.

ymmv,

doug s.

[Danny Richie]

well, i think they're outstanding speakers in all respects - except for that softness & lack of detail in the treble.

Yes, I remember your response. Where's the treble?

I have no idea why you got that response at your house.

These are by a good margin the most detailed tweeters on the market. The measured response on the pair you received was flat as a pancake. You couldn't have asked for them to be more accurate.

When I got them back I re-measured them immediately. They were perfect still. I listened to them as did many others. The highs were extended, detailed, and not soft or laid back at all.

This is the pair that was sent to you.



As you can see the top end did not roll off. In fact the top end was a little on the hot side by about a db.

The next owner had quite the opposite impression that you had.

The only thing I can think of is that the speakers you are used to listening to have a greatly tipped up high end and you are simply used to it. It is easy for people to associated a louder level in the highs for more detail.

I would suggest that you get someone to shoot a response curve of your speakers to see what it is that you are used to.

[doug s.]

hi danny,

yes, i know these speakers measure pretty flat.  the other speakers i am familiar with - proacs & merets mostly, w/a sprinkling of totem, and swans thrown in for good measure - are not what i would consider tipped up or hot.  and, while certainly not as accurate as the measurements you do, all these speakers were set up w/the aid of a 12-band spectrum analyzer & pink noise generator, due to my use of active x-over & subwoofers.  

the only anomalies i ever noted were w/the swan m1.2's, & this was in the mid-bass, which was rather fuller than i would have liked.  in fact, these speakers sounded best w/my modded wave-8 amps, crossed over at 125hz to my larger subs, as opposed to using my mesa baron amp, & a more typical 50-80hz range x-over setting.  the waves are much leaner in the bass than the baron, & the vmps larger subs were less prominent between 50-125hz than the swans.  all this subjective analysis was in fact confirmed by the spectrum analyzer.

i do not think it's just me, or the fact that i like hot tweeters, that can be attributed to my findings about the diluceo's & the criterions.  especially since i have heard similar comments from more than one person, both privately, & in these forums.  and, i am not sure it's the extreme treble where the detail is missing.  i think it may in fact be in the midrange and lower treble.  this is due to the recent comment from someone that's heard both the criterions & unmodded 626r's, & finds the 626r's much more detailed.  since the tweet in the 626r only plays from 7khz on up, perhaps its the range between 2khz-6khz that is what i am most sensitive to.  and, in fact, your measurements do indicate a slight lowering of response in this area.  while it's not a lot, i understand that a small dip (or peak) in frequency response *is* more discernable, when extended over a large band, than potentially larger dips/peaks, over smaller frequency bands.  this is the case, per measurements of the diluceos.  for the most part, the diluceos measure ~91db or more, below 1.2khz & above 5khz, while they measure ~90db or less, from 1.2khz to 5khz...

in any event, i know what i'm hearing, & not hearing.  the only other speaker i have recently auditioned in that same room, that had the same relative lack of detail were the zu monitors, which run full-range to 12khz, & then have a super-tweeter added on for the high treble.  

as for possible room contributions, anyone familiar w/pics of the room in my gallery will see that, due to the relatively large space - ~26x28x8.5, and the speakers well out into the room w/the listening position well away from room boundaries, this set-up would likely exacerbate problems of any speaker w/a tipped up, or hot treble.

regards,

doug s.

[Carlman]

One thing I've learned from this forum is that I take note of what people like or dislike.... I have found I tend to have the opposite reaction to speakers and gear as Doug S.  I also have the opposite room... 11x13x9... w/ windows, hardwoods, and a large opening to a 20' high entrance.  So, while I know the room can play a large part, I also know my hearing can play a large part.  I am particularly sensitive to hot-sounding highs.  However, when I had a pair of Revel F30's in a completely different room setup, size, etc., I didn't think they were overly hot... They were hot, but not overly so....

When I moved into my new 'hot' house , they were way too bright.  I needed more room treatment than I had money.  Just strange that a speaker that sounded so great now sounded just OK and more fatiguing than before.

On my quest to finding the perfect sound again, I tried the Diluceo's and the Criterion's.  I prefered the Diluceo for its bass.  Both had extended and detailed highs and were consistent with each other.  Overall, I found them to be just a little too bright for my tastes... and I attribute it to my room and hearing.

I know the GR speakers benefit greatly from proper setup.  I had the Criterion's for a while as a demo and had more time to play around with their positions.  Each position affected the highs differently.

So, reading comments about the high's being rolled off or in any way less than extended really surprised me.... until I read they were Doug's.  One reason I hang around AC is because I have learned people's tastes, ear, etc., and that's part of understanding the statements.  There's no wrong answer.  The GR's are rolled-off to Doug.  Not to me, though.... I'd say they're a little too bright.... for ME, though.

Between the 2 of us, that makes for a fairly neutral speaker, though!

[Jon L]

"this is due to the recent comment from someone that's heard both the criterions & unmodded 626r's, & finds the 626r's much more detailed. since the tweet in the 626r only plays from 7khz on up, perhaps its the range between 2khz-6khz that is what i am most sensitive to"

I've lived with Aurum Cantus G2 and G3(still) and have heard Danny's Criterion speakers, and you are exactly right.  When most people think of detailed sound, it really is in the frequency range much lower than mid/higher treble.  IME, most ribbons are great for treble proper, but not usually in 2-4kHz range (except for the truly huge ribbons like Raven R3, Aurum Cantus G1, Maggies).  The Aurum Cantus units are NOT analytical, bright, obviously "detailed" ribbons, especially in the 2-4kHz range.  G2 is too small to do this area properly despite the specs.  G3 is significantly better in this area.  

People who are used to aluminum/titanium/metal domes' immediacy/brightness and like it may find G2 too polite in this range.

[doug s.]

carl, yure 100% correct - you can learn a lot from folk who have differing tastes from yourself - the pattern & consistency is what's important.

jon, thanks for your comments - i agree that there has to be something going on w/these ribbons that's not in the high treble.  while i *do* like the inwerted-dome titanium focal tweets as are in my meret's, i also like soft-dome tweets like what's in my proac reference-8-signatures, & i loved the ribbon tweet that is in the swan m1.2 - a much larger ribbon than that in the diluceo & criterion.

regards,

doug s.

[Jon L]

I may be one of few people who've actually listened to a Meret speaker, and yes I do like them a lot!  They use the Focal inverted domes but successfully for once.  I always meant to pick up a pair if they show up.  I also liked my Focal titanium domes prior to switching to Aurum Cantus.  

When x-over is done right, the Focal domes give you tremendous detail, sparkle, immediacy.  I also like those ViFa ring radiators, certain horn-loaded compression drivers, etc.  Heck, I even like some larger paper tweeters in my old Pioneer speakers.  

I do think people put too much emphasis on SOTA tweeters (JM labs Be tweeters, ribbons, etc).  I would put most of my money into a fantastic midrange driver, be it cone, planar, ribbon, electrostat.

[doug s.]

I may be one of few people who've actually listened to a Meret speaker, and yes I do like them a lot!  They use the Focal inverted domes but successfully for once.  I always meant to pick up a pair if they show up.  I also liked my Focal titanium domes prior to switching to Aurum Cantus.  

When x-over is done right, the Focal domes give you tremendous detail, sparkle, immediacy.  I also like those ViFa ring radiators, certain horn-loaded compression drivers, etc.  Heck, I even like some larger paper twee ...

there was a pair of meret ankh's f/s a while back on audiogon - no bidders at a no-reserve starting price of something like $400.  i posted here about 'em, still no takers.  if i were in the market, i'd have jumped on 'em..  i heard 'em a while back at an s'phile show in nyc - easily in my personal top-5 best-of-show sound.  it was hearing those that convinced me to buy the re's w/o having ever heard 'em, on a good internet deal.  i've never regretted the purchase.  they're wery similar in design & construction to the artemis eos, not surprising since they were both designed by the same guy.  and, the midwoofer used is the same one danny uses in his criterions/diluceos, except 7", instead of 5.5".  i really like these drivers a *lot*.

regards,

doug s.

[JoshK]

eton drivers kick ass!  I've never heard a speaker that uses them sound bad.  Of course I have never played with the raw drivers....*yet*.

[doug s.]

hey jon, for kicks, i searched the archives, & found the link to those ankh's - dunno if the owner ever sold 'em, but the link still works:

http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/auc.pl?spkrmoni&1079662074&1&3&1&

also dunno what drivers are in 'em...

doug s.