Supposedly these full range drivers have amazing detail and imagery.
Full range drivers are tricky.
The advantage, is that because there's no crossover, the apparent image source will be more coherent than if there's multiple drivers. That said, crossover designers like our very own TLS Guy and Dennis Murphy will put together sufficiently complex and coherent crossovers anyways.
The other advantage, is that because there's one driver with a fixed diameter, its shift from omni at Low Frequencies to narrow at High Frequencies will be reasonably smooth.
The disadvantages include
- No cone material is pistonic over a wide bandwidth, given a large diaphram. So you basically have to use a non pistonic cone material. That said, this aluminum driver looks pretty good:
http://www.solen.ca/pdf/ejjordan/jx92s.pdf
- A small driver (IE 3" or smaller) will be unable to reproduce lower frequencies at meaningful SPLS. Compromised dynamics are a form of distortion. For nearfield it might be acceptable but otherwise you're out of luck if you want bass. Small drivers will both lack capability to move air, and will also lack efficiency.
-A larger driver (IE 2" or larger) will narrow its directivity so much that it actually begins to beam high frequencies. While some amount of narrowed directivity can be a good thing (as it reduces the intensity of early reflections), full on beaming is generally undesirable because it means a head in a vice sweet spot that may not sound correct.
-Not using a filter could give you a sub-par FR.
Will I get better sound reproduction making my own cabinet with one of these rather than buying a $3000-$4000 Tower?
Considering the many awesome speakers in those price ranges (Philharmonic 2, KEF R700, Salk, Pioneer S3-EX, JBL 6332, Geddes Abbey, and Revel F52) I doubt it. Crossovers are just one necessary evil, and all speakers have their compromises.
