RBH - Ribbon Tweeters

[Reorx]

I have a general RBH question.

I see a lot of speaker companies now using ribbon tweeters. Monitor Audio, Ascend, Philharmonics, Behringer, level 3, Golden Ear, etc.
I have heard a few of them, and they sound pretty good.

• Has RBH experimented, or brought out any speakers that use ribbon tweeters?

It would seem like a good idea. They already have great sounding speakers with silk dome tweeters. If a customer wanted the ribbon tweeter sound instead, having an available product might make good business sense.

One of my friends who does custom installs (MA dealer and a few others), dissed RBH saying they are not keeping up with the times, and they have fallen behind. He knows of 5 dealers that moved away from RBH. I have only heard the RBH 661, and MC-6C's so I couldn't speak to their high end product lines, or have directly compared them to any ribbon speakers. Nor am I in the industry where I have access to do side by side comparisons.

I have read some of the differences between ribbon and soft dome. There are plenty of forum threads and comparisons out there between the two.

Just my thoughts and question. I am not putting down RBH.

 

[gene]

There are pros and cons of each tweeter type. Very few ribbons can keep up dynamically with the very best domes.

However, RBH is coming out with a series of products with the very highest caliber AMT tweeters as you can see here.

http://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/rbh-sound-sv-line-speakers

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I have a general RBH question.

• Has RBH experimented, or brought out any speakers that use ribbon tweeters?

H.

As Gene mentioned, ribbon tweeters do not dominate good dome tweeters. They simply have different strengths and weaknesses. (BTW, an AMT is not really a ribbon tweeter--it works on a different principle. True ribbons require transformers, and there is no mass to the driving element other than the extremely low mass of the foil ribbon element. I've worked with most of the AMT's out there, and I'm not a fan. The original and very large Heil AMT could produce excellent sound once the frequency response deviations were tamed with a lot of crossover elements. But the smaller ones currently in use have uneven response and lack air, IMHO.) Ribbons excel at producing a wide open sound that's free of any sssssssssssssssssssss quality on cymbals, triangles, and massed strings. But they tend to have higher harmonic distortion at the lower end of their operating range. I've never heard a dome that could equal a good ribbon at the very highest frequencies. But at high volume and with program material with lots of content in the 2-4 kHz range, such as rock, a dome may be a better choice.

 

[Reorx]

Thanks for the replies.
AVrant just broke down the differences as well this week.

From the sounds of things, they all basically do the same thing...move air. It just comes down to how good the speaker designers are, and if they are able to design around the con's, and make up for the deficiencies.

 

[JohnnieB]

I am a huge ribbon fan. The lack of sibilance alone sold me. I do find, as Dennis mentioned, that at higher volumes with rock and metal the ribbons start to sound compressed. Sort of like they run out of headroom. I see Monitor Audio has a tweeter design where a ribbon and a dome share the same faceplate. Not being a speaker designer, I can only assume this is to take advantage of the strengths of both designs. Does anyone have experience or listening time with these tweeters? How does theory stack up against output with this type of hybrid design? Thoughts?

 

[allargon]

I fell in love with ribbons when hearing BG Radias back in 2007. (It's been that long?) Ironically, I went to that dealer wanting to hear some RBH speakers because of a review I read on Audioholics!

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I fell in love with ribbons when hearing BG Radias back in 2007. (It's been that long?) Ironically, I went to that dealer wanting to hear some RBH speakers because of a review I read on Audioholics!

Actually, the BG's aren't ribbons. They're planars, which are sort of between domes and ribbons. They have a voice coil etched onto the mylar drive element, so the moving mass isn't as low as a ribbon's. By the same token, they can perform better at lower frequencies. I use a BG planar as a midrange in my Phil 3 speaker, so I obviously like them. Since this thread started, I've worked with one dome tweeter that may just combine the best of both worlds--very low harmonic distortion down low but a very ribbon-like sound at the top. It's the Transducer Lab Be dome. Unfortunately, it's very expensive compared with a lot of ribbons, including the RAAL I use in the BMR monitor.

 

[charmerci]

But at high volume and with program material with lots of content in the 2-4 kHz range, such as rock, a dome may be a better choice.

This I can attest to first hand - outside of the best rock recordings, of course.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Obviously if ONE type of driver sounded better than everything else, everyone would be using that ONE type of driver.

I've tried very hard for many hours comparing speaker sounds among many highly regarded speakers.

In the end, I gave up because any differences in tweeter sound among great sounding speakers were just insignificant to me.

Sometimes I think people will hear what they want to hear secondary to bias. I'm sure some will disagree.

IMO great speakers simply sound great regardless of driver type and material (ribbons vs domes, beryllium vs diamond vs titanium vs magnesium vs aluminum ).

 

[JohnnieB]

Obviously if ONE type of driver sounded better than everything else, everyone would be using that ONE type of driver.

Perhaps. Cost is a major factor though, people have to be able to afford the product.
I read that SEAS has a new diamond tweeter but, the cost may put it out of reach for a majority of people or designers who are trying to stay within a certain price point.
Have you had a chance to hear the new SEAS diamond Dennis?

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Perhaps. Cost is a major factor though, people have to be able to afford the product.
I read that SEAS has a new diamond tweeter but, the cost may put it out of reach for a majority of people or designers who are trying to stay within a certain price point.
Have you had a chance to hear the new SEAS diamond Dennis?

No--I wanted to, but I didn't meet their dress code.

 

[charmerci]

No--I wanted to, but I didn't meet their dress code.

??? You know the dress code to anywhere is simply your zip code preceded by this - $.

 

[John Daddabbo]

I am a huge ribbon fan. The lack of sibilance alone sold me. I do find, as Dennis mentioned, that at higher volumes with rock and metal the ribbons start to sound compressed. Sort of like they run out of headroom. I see Monitor Audio has a tweeter design where a ribbon and a dome share the same faceplate. Not being a speaker designer, I can only assume this is to take advantage of the strengths of both designs. Does anyone have experience or listening time with these tweeters? How does theory stack up against output with this type of hybrid design? Thoughts?

Yes - Legacy Audio has (had) been doing that for years in there very successful Focus speaker.

 

[Ernie Schmuntz]

I believe the Danish reference tweeter RBH has been using sounds incredible. I have listened to both at their Layton shop. I love my Reference 770 just as they are. Even if you could upgrade to the AMT (doubt the cabinets would work) I wouldn’t.

 

[Art Vandelay]

I used the 15cm Raal ribbon tweeters as replacements for Infinity Emits with fantastic results, but still acknowledge that even the best ribbons are not optimum for all designs. However, in a 3 way (T-M-W) vertical driver array the typically limited vertical dispersion can be used to work in their favour, by reducing the opportunity for unwanted diffraction, and by helping to reduce destructive interference related holes in the vertical polar response in the vicinity of the crossover frequency, above and below tweeter axis.

As others have said though, they are usually dynamically challenged below about 4kHz, and THD can and usually is audible in the form of a characteristic or signature sound that's subject to individual preference.

In the past, ribbons were developed to get around problems and limitations inherent in dome design and construction, but with so many outstanding domes to chose from these days - thanks mostly to ongoing R&D investments, shortcomings are increasingly trivial and inaudible.

 

[Art Vandelay]

I am a huge ribbon fan. The lack of sibilance alone sold me. I do find, as Dennis mentioned, that at higher volumes with rock and metal the ribbons start to sound compressed. Sort of like they run out of headroom. I see Monitor Audio has a tweeter design where a ribbon and a dome share the same faceplate. Not being a speaker designer, I can only assume this is to take advantage of the strengths of both designs. Does anyone have experience or listening time with these tweeters? How does theory stack up against output with this type of hybrid design? Thoughts?

Super-tweeters are difficult to make work seamlessly because the high-ish crossover point demands a small physical distance between the two - to avoid combing and other ill effects. Ribbons with domes is even more problematic due to the relative positions of the ribbon and voice coil, making it difficult to achieve phase alignment with both mounted on a common baffle. Inevitably there must be a compromise somewhere.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I believe the Danish reference tweeter RBH has been using sounds incredible. I have listened to both at their Layton shop. I love my Reference 770 just as they are. Even if you could upgrade to the AMT (doubt the cabinets would work) I wouldn’t.

I have both the RBH SX-T2/R Towers (Reference silk dome) and new SVT Towers (ribbons).

Both sound awesome.

The new Ribbon tweeter in the SVT has twice the surface area compared to the old SX-T2/R ribbons.

Subjectively, the new ribbons might have a slight edge in overall sound, but I couldn’t say for sure if one is really better sounding than the other.

I would be 100% happy with either one.

 

[TLS Guy]

As Gene mentioned, ribbon tweeters do not dominate good dome tweeters. They simply have different strengths and weaknesses. (BTW, an AMT is not really a ribbon tweeter--it works on a different principle. True ribbons require transformers, and there is no mass to the driving element other than the extremely low mass of the foil ribbon element. I've worked with most of the AMT's out there, and I'm not a fan. The original and very large Heil AMT could produce excellent sound once the frequency response deviations were tamed with a lot of crossover elements. But the smaller ones currently in use have uneven response and lack air, IMHO.) Ribbons excel at producing a wide open sound that's free of any sssssssssssssssssssss quality on cymbals, triangles, and massed strings. But they tend to have higher harmonic distortion at the lower end of their operating range. I've never heard a dome that could equal a good ribbon at the very highest frequencies. But at high volume and with program material with lots of content in the 2-4 kHz range, such as rock, a dome may be a better choice.

I have to say, I don't think you have to avoid domes to avoid sibilance. I absolutely abhor sibilance. None of my speakers have that issue. I'm sorry but, I don't think you have to face the significant downsides of a ribbon to avoid a speaker being sibilant.

 

[jsc1979]

I have to say, I don't think you have to avoid domes to avoid sibilance. I absolutely abhor sibilance. None of my speakers have that issue. I'm sorry but, I don't think you have to face the significant downsides of a ribbon to avoid a speaker being sibilant.

What are the significant downsides of a true ribbon tweeter?

 

[TLS Guy]

What are the significant downsides of a true ribbon tweeter?

Power limitation and increased distortion with falling frequency compared to domes. In addition dispersion is different which is not truly a downside. However a dome has even lateral and vertical dispersion, while a ribbon has excellent lateral dispersion but vertical dispersion very limited. This is a plus minus situation, but integration with moving coil drivers can be an issue.

I just don't see the need for the complexity, especially having to use a transformer. The other issue is that performance of ribbons is known to undergo subtle degradation over time. This is because, especially with hard driving, the fragile aluminum ribbon can and often does stretch over time. So you have to keep an eye on them.