Aluminium Drivers:RBH, Monitor Audio, Thiel

Hide sidebar Show sidebar
S

satish536

Audioholic
M

MDS

Audioholic Spartan
I spoke at length with an Axiom audio customer service rep and specifically asked about their choice of aluminum drivers. I've heard the complaints that Axiom can be 'bright' and that is something I personally cannot deal with - exaggerated high freqencies just bother the heck out of me.

He basically said that their research has concluded that the choice of driver material does not really affect the sound. So, if you believe that line of reasoning, the characteristic of alumimun driver vs paper driver wouldn't tell you anything about whether one speaker design would sound brighter than another.

Room acoustics certainly play a huge role in the sound of any speaker, but I don't know, I'm kind of leery of anything using a metallic material. It just seems logical that a piece of aluminum has the potential to sound more shrill than say kevlar or paper as the material of choice for a driver.
 
Davemcc

Davemcc

Audioholic Spartan
I've listened to those Thiels in the side by side in a demo room with Paradigm S8's. The Thiel have a very precise, detailed sound that does not exhibit what I can only describe as the rich, resonant midrange I seem to find in many tower speakers. Bass response also seemed a little light to me. Not that it wasn't there, but it doesn't seem to be a bass prominent speaker. The Paradigms, on the other hand, had such a rich, resonant mid/bass that I couldn't help but think that I was listening to the cabinet instead of the music.

I think it might be reasonable to assume that somebody who likes the light, detailed sound of the Thiel probably would not like certain other speakers.

All the above - IMO.
 
Geno

Geno

Senior Audioholic
The guy reviewing the Thiel speakers lost me when I got to the "battery biased interconnects" part. Since I listen to Monitor Audio speakers, with ceramic/aluminum/magnesium drivers, I naturally have to defend their sound or admit I'm an idiot for falling for them. My idiocy aside, I truly enjoy my speakers. There are so many brands and types of construction out there that trying to say one of them is clearly superior is a complete waste of time, IMHO.

Of course, that's just my opinion - I could be wrong...
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
Just because a woofer or tweeter is shiny, doesn't mean that it sounds bright. I have heard speakers with metal midwoofers that sounded great, and those that sounded harsh and unpleasant. I don't think you can generalize about that.

I do agree that metal drivers, when used in a well executed design, tend to sound somewhat more detailed and revealing than coated paper drivers. This comes down to a matter of taste and preference.

This same idea was discussed yesterday, where I tried to show how metal midwoofers often have prominent break-up noise in the mid-treble range. A 6½" metal woofer produced loud noise above 6 kHz, when the crossover might be set a 2 kHz. It is up to the crossover network to filter out that noise so that it does't intrude on the tweeter. Sometimes this isn't done adequately, and other times it is. I believe that is what often causes people to assume that metal drivers always sound harsh.
 
Hi Ho

Hi Ho

Audioholic Samurai
My DIY speakers have aluminum cone woofers and silk dome tweeters. I love thier sound! They don't sound at all harsh. The mid range and high end is very smooth and detailed. Bass response is excellent for a 6" woofer.

With that said, my first attempt at a crossover in the same speakers was not as successful. I used a basic design that was pretty much a copy of a standard crossover available at PartsExpress. That crossover yielded a rather harsh sound and the mid range was less than impressive. The guys at AudioKarma helped me design a better (and of course, much more expensive) crossover that mitigated cone breakup in the aluminum woofer. I am now extremely happy with my speakers.
 
Last edited:
dorokusai

dorokusai

Full Audioholic
Silk is king in my book but I've heard some Al domes that are better than others. Vintage Kef is an prime example for me, although the newer lines are not what I recall from the old days. I don't know what goes into the nuances of the construction but they definitely vary between manufacturers sonically.

Mark
Polk Audio CS
 
obscbyclouds

obscbyclouds

Senior Audioholic
Hi Ho said:
With that said, my first attempt at a crossover in the same speakers was not as successful. I used a basic design that was pretty much a copy of a standard crossover available at PartsExpress. That crossover yielded a rather harsh sound and the mid range was less than impressive. The guys at AudioKarma helped me design a better (and of course, much more expensive) crossover that mitigated cone breakup in the aluminum woofer. I am now extremely happy with my speakers.
Click to expand...
I guess that pretty much proves that cabinet and crossover design have a much more of an impact over speaker sound quality and timbre than just the meterial used in the actual woofer or tweeter. It is after all the movement of air that creates the sound we hear, rather than the woofer itself.
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
I find that metal mid/bass drivers do color the sound a bit, but the crossover is also going to play a huge role in that ultimately. I have heard speakers with aluminum drivers that sounded shrill, and others that almost didn't sound like they were metal at all.
 
Tomorrow

Tomorrow

Audioholic Ninja
gene said:
I've never been a fan of concentric drivers. We've reviewed Thiel speakers in the past and found nothing too special about them other than nice cabinetry and exhorbitant pricing.

Audioholics Review:
http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/speakers/floorstanding/thiel-audio-speakers
Click to expand...
I think Gene is right on. My experience with Thiel was in a nearby hi-end audio store. I managed to audition them right along-side Paradigms, Aerial Acoustics, KEF's, and a few others. They were the worst loudspeakers in the place. The coaxial drivers sounded like a sock had been stuffed into them. There was lots of air on the top end...lol, nothing but air. The top rolled off so badly I had to strain to hear my auditioning materials. There is nothing shrill about these things. (All speakers were driven by Krell or equivalent, btw.) I had high hopes for these speakers. They're lovely. But...well, now I'll have nothing to do with any design by them.

And incidentally, I was turned off by all the Paradigms in the place, as well. Dave had it right. They (all models) have tons of cabinet resonance, IMHO. They have lots of really fleshy mids and bass, but ack...the resonance killed it for me.

Aerials! Now there ya go! One day......:)
 
Z

zumbo

Audioholic Spartan
For what it's worth, I am a huge fan of Monitor Audio speakers.

Materials don't matter as much as other things I don't understand.

The best woofers I have ever heard were paper/blend. Second was poly.

The best mids I have ever heard were Kevlar. Second was poly.

The best tweeters were aluminum. Second was titanium.

I have heard nasty speakers built with every one of the above materials. So best should be followed by the manufacturer, rather than the material.
 
Last edited:
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
For me, soft domes for tweeters all the way.

Midrange - paper, treated/paper sounds the most natural.

Bass - no preference, they all sound pretty good.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Well, what about those diamond tweeters and midranges I've heard about on some $250K speakers? How does that work?
 
WmAx

WmAx

Audioholic Samurai
j_garcia said:
For me, soft domes for tweeters all the way.

Midrange - paper, treated/paper sounds the most natural.

Bass - no preference, they all sound pretty good.
Click to expand...
I can, with relative ease, make high quality metal drivers sound as natural as one could want -- virtual transparency (with a properly designed and built cabinet system -- critical). Driver material itself is not as important as other issues. However, it would be difficult to take any driver that had a large number of resonances inherent of the diaphragm that existed in the pass band and make it work as a transparent device. Even if someone wanted a resonance (for euphoric reasons), I can still achieve better results by taking a system that is first transparent in all regards, and then add in the resonance electronically to achieve the specific resonance effects that one desires in the exact amounts/bands that is preferred.

-Chris
 
Seth=L

Seth=L

Audioholic Overlord
The last pair of Thiel I listened to used metalic drivers, I believe they used to use paper and maybe they still do. To me the Thiels sounded like a refined version of my Infinitys, which I loved that about them. They wheren't very big for a tower speaker, but they had sufficient and accurate bass. In my opinion Thiel makes a classical speaker, they are articulate and they will reveal any garbage in a poor recording, plain and simple. I think that is why so many people associate Thiel with classical music and other articulate types of music, because anything else (poor recorded) will be revealed and destroyed.:)
 
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
Every pair of Thiels that I have ever heard reminded me of someone stepping on a plum. I have never been impressed with them for the price. They reminded me circa 1990's Polk stuff. Not horrible but not dynamic or very good in the low end either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis

Sitemap

Sitemap

Site Information

Site Information

HTML

audio forum
  • Facebook
  • Youtube
  • Twitter
  • instagram
  • rss
Top