# A rainbow tweeter comparison



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

Thanks to 3.5max6spd for donating the cal27.

Drive level 3.6vrms taken at 1/4m.

*Rainbow cal27*
Nice, comparable performance to the higher end cal28. I did find the cal28 to have better top end dispersion however. The cal27 has a more forward sound.








*Rabinbow cal28*
Similar sensitivity to the cal27, and slightly better distortion performance. Top end dispersion is noticeably better as well. This one sounds brighter in the topmost octaves, but overall more laid back tonally than the cal27.








*
Seas Lotus 27*
Top end begins to droop a little. Distortion performance very similar to the cal28.








*Seas 27tafnc/g (neo alums)*
Nothing new here. Smoothest response on axis, and the best distortion performance. Doesn't hurt that it's by far the cheapest driver as well. Needs a diffuser to keep up it's off-axis performance.


----------



## low (Jun 2, 2005)

cool info dude..thanks.


----------



## andthelam (Aug 9, 2006)

Dang, you've taken car audio to whole new level. And we love you for it .


----------



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

cool. i should really pick up some seas neos to see what all the fuss is about... dont really need tweeters tho and i definitely need money right now.


----------



## dogstar (Jan 31, 2007)

Guess I really should just go order some seas neos... I keep reading how good they are, eventually Ill break down and just order them 

Thanks for the comparo.


----------



## 3.5max6spd (Jun 29, 2005)

At $399 srp for the pair the Cal27 is certainly a nice alternative to the $849 retail Cal28, and a good alternative to the Lotus tweet as well-considering these can be had below retail. Certainly not as deep as either - without the burden of the Seas terminals location/layout and the Platinums big ass and terminals on the backside, these are certainly much easier to mount and move around in the car- that is if you can live with the 4point professional mounting style wide flange of the Cal27.

Having used both the Cal28 and Cal27 , honestly both are such of kin and its a toss up really for me. Both share similar tonal qualities and ques with the Platinums being a tad bit more refined, but the Cal27's can sure take aggressive volume and in my experience have a stronger off axis dispersion along with that sensitivity. In my install with a very off axis , low location in my kickpanels I experienced my stage raise a few inches with the simple swap using the same xover point. The strings on these tweets really stand out for me and sound most excellent. Being a bit more sensitive and forward, they really are my choice over the Plats at higher volumes with acoustic music. They are very lively and organic sounding and dont show strain when driven hard. They also have that enjoyable smooth quality and rolloff many tend to enjoy.

Just for reference as everyone reading about the Rainbow tweeters knows them as the Cal'xx.

This is Rainbows newest tooled tweeter and component set. Its part of the 
Powerline CS 275.27 component set. It is mated to a 7" driver that derives from the 7" Vanadium SUBwoofer. Huge motor. Its basically their balls outset , the full set srp is $1229.00. Well below the Lotus, Platinums, i think in the ball park of the nicer Mille set. Just for clarification, they are the set below the Platinums in the Rainbow hierarchy.
http://car.rainbow-audio.de/products/introduction.php?lan=2&pro=1&lin=5

Thank you Nguyen for your time, very much appreciated. I'll see if i can get you a few others to test when the opportunity arises.


----------



## iyamwutiam (Nov 20, 2006)

I would love to see a review of the platinum 7" versus the scanspeak 7, peeless xls etc.


----------



## thazy2 (Feb 10, 2007)

Newbie:


How do u read those charts? English please.........


thanks...........


----------



## azngotskills (Feb 24, 2006)

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1002


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

It amazes me how flat the Seas Neo is in your measurement as well as how low and even the distortion is.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

What a difference a real baffle makes  Drive level was barely 3 watts for a 4 ohm tweeter and it was pretty loud. Makes me wonder where these people with their 300 watts on their tweeter are thinking...


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

So, I am curious on these seas neo alums as I have the audition set right now. Do you feel a good baffle (nice flat surface) is necessary for the seas neo, or for tweeters in general? In car environment, you might not always have a good baffle option.

I'm still organizing my thoughts on the tweeters and want to go back and listen to a few again, but my initial thoughts on the seas neos was that I did not enjoy them. Maybe they are just not my cup of tea.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

A baffle will impact diffraction, and it's best to use one if possible. In my tests, I never used a baffle, so I stay consistent with that so that relative comparisons are more meaningful.

I thought long and hard about this issue in considering whether the large format tweeters in my comparison had a huge advantage due to their large mounting flange. One interesting bit of data is that I did, in fact, machine the mounting flange off (what I could at least) from a pair of Hiquphon OWII tweeters. The response definitely changed, but my overall impression of the tweeter didn't differ significantly. Another point: in car, it all goes out the window, because the car environment is so different, and where/how you mount the tweeters will dramatically impact the response more than anything. This is especially the case when it comes to reflection of high frequencies. The relative impact of the baffle and diffraction is very small when compared to reflective impacts on high frequencies in the car. Just my 2 cents. Probably obvious, but good to say.


----------



## iyamwutiam (Nov 20, 2006)

I am curious - would it be possible to see what these do aff-axis. I am not sure how many people are using only tweeters in the kick panels. I think may are using them in sail panels and a pillar installs. 

Would measuring them off-axis be more helpful in terms of evaluating a tweeter for use in car audio? Also how were you able to surmise the dispersion if you measured them on axis - nearfield?


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

shinjohn said:


> A baffle will impact diffraction, and it's best to use one if possible. In my tests, I never used a baffle, so I stay consistent with that so that relative comparisons are more meaningful.


That is what we did too. Actually our setup was very similar to how you did your testing.



> Another point: in car, it all goes out the window, because the car environment is so different, and where/how you mount the tweeters will dramatically impact the response more than anything. This is especially the case when it comes to reflection of high frequencies. The relative impact of the baffle and diffraction is very small when compared to reflective impacts on high frequencies in the car. Just my 2 cents. Probably obvious, but good to say.


That is kind of what I was thinking too. I'll probably stick with my gut (or ears) on this then. Thanks!


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

As long as it's for comparative purposes you don't really need a baffle when doing listening tests. If you're trying to draw any real substantive conclusions though, I'd probably listen to them by themselves flush mounted on a baffle. In other words I wouldn't call a tweeter harsh/warm/thin/veiled if you didn't have it mounted properly on a baffle, but I would say that tweeter A had better low end sensitivity or top end dispersion than tweeter B, or that it was more efficient, etc. With measuring, it really depends on what you're measuring and if it can be tested in the nearfield a baffle is not required.

The off-axis performance or power response is very critical Imho to how a tweeter sounds, more so even than distortion performance. And one thing alot of people overlook is that a tweeter with a wide top end dispersion vs. a narrow dispersion will sound very different even when mounted directly on-axis.


----------



## FoxPro5 (Feb 14, 2006)

Great, now I'm going to have to get the Cal 27's.  

Thanks for the comparo. I like how you snuck that Neo in there to rub it in a little.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

durwood said:


> So, I am curious on these seas neo alums as I have the audition set right now. Do you feel a good baffle (nice flat surface) is necessary for the seas neo, or for tweeters in general? In car environment, you might not always have a good baffle option.
> 
> I'm still organizing my thoughts on the tweeters and want to go back and listen to a few again, but my initial thoughts on the seas neos was that I did not enjoy them. Maybe they are just not my cup of tea.


Perhaps you heard them under non-optimal conditions? Although low distortion and flat on axis response is only several of many factors that would need to come together to make for a great sounding sounding tweeter.


----------



## lucas569 (Apr 17, 2007)

thazy2 said:


> Newbie:
> 
> 
> How do u read those charts? English please.........
> ...



unlike a womans chest the flatter the better... 

those seas look amzing on paper btw! i have to stop reading these thread im going to go broke looking for nirvana!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

the rainbows look nice too but damn $$$


----------



## JAG (May 6, 2006)

Hey Nguyen ..... I'd love to hear your thoughts on just what it is that Rainbow seems to be doing so " right " with their small format tweeters ....
I mean , they are not going to be everyone's cup of tea , but almost NO-ONE ever finds them anything less than immensely listenable , and enjoyable overall .... How do they manage to get them to sound so smooth , and yet not lack too much detail ?

Also , which large format tweeter would you say has the most similiar sound to the Rainbow offerings ? I'm gonna guess the OWII maybe ?


----------



## 3.5max6spd (Jun 29, 2005)

I often wondered this too, but in general. For instance how important would say the actual coating used on the dome be responsible for tonality. Anymore than cone material is responsible in drivers? Or is it more about the approach taken in the motor design?


----------



## Arc (Aug 25, 2006)

How do the Neo Alums compare to the Neo Text?


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

To me, frequency response and top end dispersion is the most critical factor. That's why Imho the cal28 sounds so good.

You have a -5db dip below 5khz that really mellows out the driver, with a smooth response above and below that. You also have good low end extension past 1khz (with the chambered version). Also key is that the driver has excellent top end dispersion so that gives you alot of air and detail up top... which is why I like ribbons 

With the Seas neo... it's very flat on-axis, but the off-axis response drops like a brick past 10khz even with the diffuser. That tends to make it more forward sounding. Also, with typical car audio mounting the driver is never flush against a flat surface, which generally leads to massive peaks in the response below 5khz that tend to make the driver harsher and more aggressive. A good example is in the home, where just simply not flush mounting the tweeter on a baffle will give you a nice 2-3db bump at 2khz... a region where your ear is very sensitive.

Not to say that low distortion isn't nice... if you've ever listened to say a Scan 7100 playing full tilt compared to the cal28 it's a huge difference... but between these small tweets it's mostly a matter of how low you can cross... otherwise it's going to be very difficult for the average person to hear a 5-10db difference in distortion especially above 5khz.


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

3.5max6spd said:


> I often wondered this too, but in general. For instance how important would say the actual coating used on the dome be responsible for tonality. Anymore than cone material is responsible in drivers? Or is it more about the approach taken in the motor design?


Very critical as it impacts the sensitivity and fr of the tweeter. The shape of the dome is also important as it affects the off-axis response. Motor design affects the efficiency and distortion performance, and the rear chamber loading will impact the low end sensitivity.


----------



## less (Nov 30, 2006)

I sure would like to see some Cal26 silks compared/reviewed here  If I had a spare set, I would send mine in but I know I would simply jones too much haha. 

I haven't heard enough of the other tweeters, having no real friends locally to listen to, but I can say that the CAL26 from my profi set is a VERY listenable speaker that just grows and grows on you. It requires very little tweaking to sound quite decent, and as you (and your system) grow in finess and opportunity, you can learn to really make these sing. 

I am sure that there are reviews out there, since they have been out for some time, but there are a lot of newer models that would not be involved in the heads up comparison. 

Lastly, thanks to those of you who write the reviews. For the most part I tend to prefer those that pass along subjective descriptions and attempt the challenging task of using words to describe the finer qualities of drivers and systems. 

I am amazed with all of the detail we see here from NPDang and some others - and they can be a nice tool. Personally though, I have to watch is as I can get all wrapped up in numbers and lose track of the root of what a driver is supposed to do - sound good. Being a numbers junkie, I fall prey to that type of thing time and again. 

Happy weekend!
LEss


----------



## slim j (Nov 30, 2005)

Do the Cal28 have the angle mount option?


----------



## Se7en (Mar 28, 2007)

slim j said:


> Do the Cal28 have the angle mount option?


Yes, they do.


----------



## slim j (Nov 30, 2005)

How does it mount?

Does it protrude below the mounting base?


----------



## Bom (Jul 5, 2007)

Seas Alu tweeter is good. I love it too.


----------

