Horn vs. Dome

[gliz]

I have been a silk dome fan for years. I have been looking at horn loaded tweeters as of late. I hear that there is a big difference, is this true?

 

[Exit]

Horn loaded tweeters usually means Klipsch and they are generally considered bright sounding speakers. I have four Klipsch SS.5 surround speakers which have a total of eight horn loaded tweeters. They don't get much of a workout as surrounds but when I had them hooked up as main channels for testing, they sounded fine to me. It may be different for direct firing horn loaded speakers. Anyway one of the benefits to horn loaded tweeters is usually higher efficiency, meaning they require less power than some other typesl

 

[Joe Schmoe]

The only horn speakers I have heard are Klipsch, and I hate those. (Way too bright and harsh.)

 

[gliz]

One thing I have noticed is I have never seen a horn loaded tweeter in a recording studio and least for the mastering process. my main consern is sound quality.

 

[trnqk7]

I listened to some Klipsch speakers before I got my Dali's...they aren't bad at all IMO. I think I get more clarity from my current setup than they Klipsch's, but I still have what a lot of people would consider "bright" speakers (FYI-Dali Ikons and the higher models all have 2 tweeters-a dome tweeter and a ribbon tweeter). I also enjoy the sound of Axiom's speakers, so keep that in mind. But the Klipsch were nice speakers and IMO would be great movie speakers, not as sure about pure music listening. These also weren't the best of Klipsch offerings, somewhere towards the middle I believe.

 

[Pyrrho]

I have been a silk dome fan for years. I have been looking at horn loaded tweeters as of late. I hear that there is a big difference, is this true?

Don't buy a speaker based on the type of driver it has. Buy based on sound. If one type magically was always best in every way, every manufacturer would probably be making them.

By the way, a lot of companies besides Klipsch have made speakers with horns, and some of them have been used in recording studios (like Electro-Voice, which is a company that has made a variety of types of speakers, including studio monitors with soft domes and with horns).

That said, I currently own speakers with ribbon tweeters, and I like them very much.

 

[gliz]

I dont usualy by based on driver type, well I never have, but I was thinking about making a change to horns. when it comes to tweeters though it "seems" like the meteral that they are composed of makes a difference. for example, mylar seems to be harsh as do metal tweeters might have been a bad crossover point though too.

 

[trnqk7]

It is usually safe, but not ALWAYS, to generalize on tweeter sound based on material in my experience. Admittedly, this isn't going to be the most vast repository of information...but, IMO, metal tweeters have generally been able to be classified as noticeably "brighter" than silk dome tweeters. That said, I generally prefer the brighter sound-executed properly. I don't feel it makes as huge a difference in home audio. My biggest experience in the difference was with car audio-I had MB Quart Reference components up from and 6.5" coaxials in the back with titantium dome tweeters. The front components were the only speakers I have ever had to/wanted to turn down the treble. Luckily, they came with their own variable crossover, so I did just that, and attenuated the high frequencies by -3dB. Big improvement in listenability.

I wonder if I noticed this big difference b/c in car audio, one sits so close to the speakers? Perhaps nearly in the near field?

Anyway, you should still listen to some metal dome tweeters and horn tweeters (I would also seek out some ribbon tweeters if you can) to see if you notice a difference...but if your general consensus after a few listens is that they are still too bright, you can probably safely generalize that they are not for you. This will help you narrow down the selection process and find (hopefully!) your audio nirvana a little sooner. There are an overwhelming number of speakers out there to audition!

Realistically, you don't probably have time to listen to all of them to make the best decision....besides, I'm sure that some on here would tell you to be sure you made the right choice, you would have to listen to everything double blind, etc to remove all bias from the equation (looks, etc could factor into how you "want" the speaker to sound b/c you like how it looks). Not to mention the difficulty of finding the same equipment to listen to it all on if you can't take every pair home, lol.

Side note-I agree with the double blind testing as being the most foolproof way to make an accurate decision. I just think it's extremely difficult for the average person to implement in their everyday busy lives. Best saved after you have it narrowed down to just a couple or three selections I would think.

 

[gliz]

could not have typed it better myself !!

 

[Seth=L]

Tweeter material is not the largest contributing factor to it's "sound", the cross-over is.

 

[trnqk7]

It wouldn't be for the brightness, the crossover does just that, defines a frequency point at which the signal is "blocked" to a particular driver and instead goes to a different one.

A metal dome tweeter or horn tweeter may be so much more efficient than the rest of the speaker, that it is naturally louder at a given signal level. I'm not saying that they specifically are, just a hypothetical example here based on my listening.

In order to bring the sensitivities of the various drivers in the speaker back together, a manufacturer SHOULD institute an attenuation circuit designed to cause a purely resistive drop (in order to not screw with phase). I incorrectly identified this in my earlier post...my bad.

This circuit is in addition to the crossover and does affect total system impedance, which then must be factored into the crossover...I'm guess what I'm saying is that they are different from each other, but have a definite relationship. Changing the attenuation circuit results in needed to change the crossover, just as changing the crossover could result in having to change the attenuation circuit.

Also, there is a chance that a manufacturer could intentionally have a xover induced rolloff on the high frequencies, but I've never heard of it (again, my experience is greater than some, but far less that others).

Attenuating the signal with resistors would be the most common and practical way of bringing the tweeter's sensitivity in line with the other drivers as a result of the tweeter being more efficient than the other drivers. Again, this is, in my experience, usually done with metal dome tweeters and I would assume horn tweeters.

 

[Seth=L]

I understand the basic purpose of a x-over, but I think there is more to it than just that. WmAx would probably have the answers to these questions.

 

[j_garcia]

By the way, you can horn load soft dome tweeters....

I have seen networks that attenuate the highs, but the fact is, that proper driver selection should mostly solve the issue of having a much higher sensitivity tweeter than midbass. The main reason for this is usually because the tweeter ends up having a peak at the top that needs to be tamed.

The fact is, different people like different sounding speakers, so I agree with Pyrrho that it comes down to the overall sound of a given speaker. Klipsch is around for a reason - there are any number of people who like them. I don't totally hate them, but I don't love them either.

 

[trnqk7]

I am sure you do, and sure he would too. But not everyone does, and it helps the other people out sometimes. Plus, you get to see my train of thought and maybe help me out too if I'm making a mistake. I feel confident in my thinking on this, but I would not swear that it is the end all, be all answer.

 

[avaserfi]

Tweeter material does not have a direct effect on resulting sound per say. Proper implementation of crossover and behavior of the specific tweeter in question are the determinants. For example, a tweeter with high order harmonic distortion, regardless of composition, will sound vastly different than another tweeter with the same frequency response and none of this distortion. Also, the specific tweeters cumulative spectral decay (CSD) would also show behavior that could potentially be perceived as 'harsh' or 'metallic'. Both of these previous examples can be found in tweeters of virtually any composition. It should also be noted that any speaker that is truly linear through the treble will be often perceived as harsh as shown by the credible perceptual research in the field. This is due to common [poor] recording techniques of today. Due to this issue various perceptual researchers have offered solutions in terms of roll-off curves that have been shown to be perceived as neutral. Example here.

In regards to types of tweeters such as planar, ribbon, dome, etc...This is yet another area where the type is not necessarily indicative of anything, but certain types are more prone to some issues due to design. For example, the majority of dome tweeters have relatively poor off-axis response. This does not mean all dome tweeters have poor off-axis response especially when compared to other domes, but due to the physics directivity of dispersion increases with higher frequencies.

 

[bandphan]

avaserfi, beyond the crossover, will housing and placement also help correct off axis responce?

 

[avaserfi]

avaserfi, beyond the crossover, will housing and placement also help correct off axis responce?

This depends on specific application. For example, when using a waveguide tweeter the off-axis response has, in a way, already been determined by the guides. Although, if one is using a non-waveguide tweeter such as a planar tweeter with a wide dispersion pattern flush mounting of the driver is an absolute must. Also, along side this flush mounting large radius (ideally at least 4') rounds would be used on the corners of the cabinet to prevent wave diffraction issues.

There is no way to increase off-axis response of a specific tweeter itself possibly baring minor, most likely acoustic, modification with proper knowledge. One must find a tweeter with appropriate intrinsic values and design from there.

 

[gliz]

thanks for all the input. I will try to find a place where I can audition some horn loaded tweeters. the SPL on some horn loaded tweets is really high, and I bet that is why they sound so dang bright. My acoustic preference is balance , balance , balance. I will stick with my AR ARVP600's for about another year. (in the past 6 months I bought an onkyo tx-sr605 and a hsu VTF2 mk3) so I am tapped out for now. The AR's are pretty good. ben a while but I might just build my own.

 

[fmw]

Tweeter material is not the largest contributing factor to it's "sound", the cross-over is.

......and the enclosure and, most important of all, the room acoustics. Horn tweeters and dome tweeters don't have a characteristic sound, nor do they sound different from one another by definition. They have a requency response that is normally published by the manufacturer so you can compare that for yourself. Horns are normally, but not always, more efficient and capable of more power handling. They are the norm in pro audio and rightfully so. They are not popular in home audio because of misinformation you read in the posts above which was fostered decades ago by the hi fi magazines.

Audiophiles, by the way, tend not to like accurate speakers. Most prefer dark, euphonic speakers. You can acheive either accuracy or euphonia with either type of tweeter.

 

[jliedeka]

As others have said, the style of tweeter isn't the determining factor. The room, cabinet, crossover and even source have a lot to do with it.

Horn tweeters have a few advantages. They tend to be more efficient because the sound has a smaller window. This can also help to mitigate reflection problems.

I have some low end Klipsch speakers. I've mostly grown to dislike them over the years but they are not too bad if you don't push them too hard. I prefer to take a little off the high end with my tone knobs. That doesn't help with cabinet resonance, though.

Jim