# beryllium and ceramic dome tweeters from TB



## kappa546 (Apr 11, 2005)

http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=264-865
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=264-866
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=264-868

those ceramic domes are certainly cheap enough to play with and with ultra low Fs on all 3 might make for a good match for metal cone mids.


----------



## Toxis (Feb 4, 2008)

8w RMS on the beryllium? Seems a tad low... lol


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

How much power do you think is going to a tweet?... RMS....


----------



## Toxis (Feb 4, 2008)

I'm getting ready to put 100w per driver.  But seriously, 8? I'd be ok if it was 20 or so but man, just seems small.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

It will never see 100W for very long if at all before you visit Belltone, 8W is actually a realistic number. I run 25W/ch and I doubt they ever really see it, maybe the peak end of that for milliseconds but 100W for a tweet, come on man, think about it.


----------



## spydertune (Sep 9, 2005)

Toxis said:


> 8w RMS on the beryllium? Seems a tad low... lol


I am more impressed with their honesty rather than spec'manship.

Pull apart a dud tweeter and look at what is actually in play for the voice-coil sometime and you'll see exactly what I mean.


----------



## havok20222 (Sep 5, 2007)

Toxis said:


> I'm getting ready to put 100w per driver.  But seriously, 8? I'd be ok if it was 20 or so but man, just seems small.


Clearly you have never seen a good 13 watt tube amp either.  Listen to Chad.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

Toxis said:


> 8w RMS on the beryllium? Seems a tad low... lol


More than enough.

The Focal Be is 15 watts 200 max.

This Beryllium Tweeter looks very interesting fs 450 I would like to see a review on this one; I love the sound of Beryllium Tweeters plus you get to have your own personal Hazmat kit.


----------



## typericey (May 13, 2006)

The beryllium is dirt cheap compared to Focal Be's...

...but a 4.33" faceplate?! daym!!!


----------



## tyroneshoes (Mar 21, 2006)

nice find. I can try these out as have the microbe mini monitors (rs125 and the Tang Band silk like these) Specs seem like I can pretty much just drop them in.


----------



## Scott Buwalda (Apr 7, 2006)

Power specifications by the AES convention are given *without* a crossover. As an example, the Legatia L1 has an 8 watt RMS / 15 watt max specification and the L1 Pro at 20/40 because I use the AES standard. It would seem apparent that they do too. 8 watts on a tweeter without a crossover means easily 50-100 watts with a crossover at two times Fs.

Scott


----------



## Hernan (Jul 9, 2006)

I'm using a small 15W x 2 for my seas neos @7khz/12db. they are holding they ground with midbasses feeded with [email protected] and Rs52 mids moved by a 70W x 2 amp.
Highs are very subtle. Not big output, just detail and spaceness.


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

tyroneshoes said:


> nice find. I can try these out as have the microbe mini monitors (rs125 and the Tang Band silk like these) Specs seem like I can pretty much just drop them in.


I'd be happy to "rent" one from you if you find them to your liking


----------



## Toxis (Feb 4, 2008)

havok20222 said:


> Clearly you have never seen a good 13 watt tube amp either.  Listen to Chad.


this is not my first rodeo bud. I've listened to probably 25 different tube amps in a home but to compare that to a car amp? Seriously?


----------



## Arc (Aug 25, 2006)

Toxis said:


> this is not my first rodeo bud. I've listened to probably 25 different tube amps in a home but to compare that to a car amp? Seriously?



Don't be defensive, they are just giving advice. 

I like the look of em. I would be interested in a 3rd party review before I throw money into em though.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Very good find. I wonder what the scoop on the Ber. one does or the diffuser on the ceramic one. I believe Infinity uses something similar on their ceramic domes too. 30 and 60 degree plots would have been nice too, especially since wide dispersion is advertised.


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

wonder how these sound compared to the focal version. Also does anyone make a beryllium 3" mid to match these? that with the 8"peerless would round out a nice active 3 way set for me.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

You'd want to match these in a 2 way to put that low FS to good use. I haven't heard of a 3 inch ber. driver. Focal uses the sandwich cones for their 3 inch mid. That along with the ATC and the Hybrid were the best 3 inch mids I've heard so far.


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

ATC and the Hybrid? i'm not familer with any of those. is there a link to where i can read a review on those and also a link to purchase either. I'm trying to find a 3" mid that has the same sound quality as the focal w coned mid.


----------



## ca90ss (Jul 2, 2005)

ATC's are available here
https://www.solen.ca/pub/cms_nf_catalogue_fiche.php?id=5&recherche=&numRows=&manufacturiers=1&niveau1=&niveau2=&niveau3=

Hybrid here
http://hybrid-audio.com/


----------



## Whiterabbit (May 26, 2006)

dispersion will be based mostly on dome size. so check out any off axis plot for any 1" tweeter and note when the rolloff starts. That's about where you will be.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

ca90ss said:


> ATC's are available here
> https://www.solen.ca/pub/cms_nf_catalogue_fiche.php?id=5&recherche=&numRows=&manufacturiers=1&niveau1=&niveau2=&niveau3=
> 
> Hybrid here
> http://hybrid-audio.com/


I get epileptic seizure everytime those display dynamics go at each other on the hybrid site :blush:



Whiterabbit said:


> dispersion will be based mostly on dome size. so check out any off axis plot for any 1" tweeter and note when the rolloff starts. That's about where you will be.


I'm aware size is the strongest factor. How about dome profile? I'd think the ceramic dome with the diffuser would have the best dispersion, and therefore be optimal for off axis mounting.


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

cvjoint said:


> You'd want to match these in a 2 way to put that low FS to good use. I haven't heard of a 3 inch ber. driver. Focal uses the sandwich cones for their 3 inch mid. That along with the ATC and the Hybrid were the best 3 inch mids I've heard so far.


Yamaha makes a 3" beryllium Mid Range driver; usher has one as well but, doesn't offer it as a standalone driver. There's the Pioneer TAD 4" beryllium compression driver:

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/P...ucts/ProfessionalSpeakers/TAD-Drivers/TD-4003

JBL makes one as well; it’s even more expensive if I remember correctly.


----------



## mowry (Feb 24, 2008)

The Tang Band TW 25-1743S is not Beryllium at all. It's a beryllium copper alloy that is typically 1.8 to 2.0 % beryllium by weight! Here's a message that I sent to Tang Band and their reply.

Dear sirs/madams: 

Kindly be advised that the Tang Band TW 25-1743S (http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1230_04/25-1743s.htm), which you advertise and represent as a Beryllium Tweeter is not Beryllium. Your claims are false and deceptive. The dome material is actually a common material used in everything from electronic toys to termination in several electronic system products. The material is actually Beryllium Copper, also known as BeCu; CDA 172, CB101, ISO CuBe2, CEN CW101C, A4/2, beryllium bronze and/or Alloy 25. The material is typically only 1.80 to 2.00 % beryllium by weight. To call this material Beryllium is like calling Beer Whiskey but frankly it's statically much worse. 

There are really three pieces of evidence. 

1. The price is too low for a Beryllium diaphragm. 

2. The color of the dome is just not the color of Beryllium. Beryllium is steel gray. 

3. The only manufacturer of Acoustic Grade Beryllium Foil (98% or better) on the planet xrayed two samples. This is what they said. "We have performed x-ray fluorescence analysis of the Tang Band "beryllium"tweeter diaphragm. Our analysis indicates that the diaphragm is primarily copper. The technique we used for the analysis is not designed to precisely quantify the composition of the sample, but I am confident that the copper content in the Tang Band tweeter diaphragm is greater than 90%.Therefore, Tang Band may be using Be-Cu for their diaphragms, but I am certain they do not use beryllium as claimed. Please let me know if you would like additional information concerning our analysis of the Tang Band"beryllium" tweeter diaphragm. 

The material properties of the BeCu and Be are vastly different. 

1. Material Properties summary for Be: 
Density 1844 kg/m^3
Young's modulus: 300 x 10^9 Pa
Poisson's ratio: 0.1
Speed of sound: 12800 m/s
http://www.matweb.com/search/DataSh...658d4a4f&ckck=1 

2. Material property summary for BeCu 

Density: 8250 kg/m^3
Young's modulus: 125 x 10^9 Pa
Poisson's ratio: 0.3
Speed of sound: 3900 m/s
http://www.matweb.com/search/DataSh...a06b668c&ckck=1 

The TW 25-1743S seems like a nice product; however, it is being represented as a "Beryllium Tweeter". Please change your description on your websites and in your advertising documentation to "Beryllium Copper Tweeter" at your earliest convenience. 

Yours, 

Steve Mowry 

http://www.s-m-audio.com/steve_mowry.html

Hello Steve,

Thanks for your comments on the Beryllium, we will correct the name to be "Beryllium Alloy". Our engineering team had ever done the experiment for different Beryllium materials from different vender and source for the dome tweeter and did lots of measurements and listening. The performance, THD, sounding and even the production control, the current one we use fit the best. Therefore, we prefer to use this Beryllium Copper to be the dome for tweeter. Anyway, thanks for your comments.

Sincerely,
Diana Huang
TB Speaker
ISO 9001-2000 certified
E-mail :[email protected]
Web : www.tb-speaker.com
Tel : 886-2-26570282


----------



## bigabe (May 1, 2007)

^^ Oh snap....


Now Critical Mass is gonna take those puppies and market them as their new CMAd.25 Adamantium Dome tweeters at a low introductory price of $3999 per tweeter.


----------



## drtool (Nov 26, 2007)

Thanks Kappa546 found my next xmas present to me.


----------



## norcalsfinest (Aug 30, 2008)

the tang band "beryllium" actually looks quite nice. Someone needs to get Zaph's hands on a set...


----------



## typericey (May 13, 2006)

you mean it's possible that there's actually no Iridium nor Nobelium content in top shelf DLS products?! this is the saddest day of my life....



 LOL


----------



## s10scooter (Feb 5, 2007)

Anyone ever pick these up?


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

^I was wondering the same thing. Looking at the response graphs of all three are very interesting. The BE version has a steadily increasing response all the way up just before 20k where it dips ever so slightly. Efficiency is great on those as well. 

The other two seem to have DEAD flat response! The mathematical side of me is saying that is a good thing but gut feel is that it might not sound natural for whatever reason. Really, looking at the graphs for the two ceramic domes, you could balance water on that graph from 1k all the way up to 20k. That SEEMS like what we all would want....but in reality....is it?


----------



## michaelsil1 (May 24, 2007)

I thought we would have at least gotten some kind of review by now.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

mowry said:


> The Tang Band TW 25-1743S is not Beryllium at all. It's a beryllium copper alloy that is typically 1.8 to 2.0 % beryllium by weight! Here's a message that I sent to Tang Band and their reply.
> 
> Dear sirs/madams:
> 
> ...



So you worked for Bose, how was that experience?


----------



## vellocet (Nov 14, 2008)

I'm definitely about to put beryllium in a google search, but what's so special about using it on tweeters?

I knew the focal Be set was crazy expensive, but wasn't aware there was crazy science behind it. Thought maybe it was just another rebadged speaker.

Just not educated enough yet to make sense out of those accoustical specs. So could someone break it down for me?


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

I just got done listening to the "Beryllium" tweeters in Tang Band's listening room a few days ago. It sounds really natural and laid back. I was pretty impressed with the speakers and components that they built (when I say components I mean the twin 1000 watt mono block amps, power re-generator, CD transport, preamp, etc that they engineered and built).

...and of course the engineering and factory aren't too bad either.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Electrodynamic said:


> I just got done listening to the "Beryllium" tweeters in Tang Band's listening room a few days ago. It sounds really natural and laid back. I was pretty impressed with the speakers and components that they built (when I say components I mean the twin 1000 watt mono block amps, power re-generator, CD transport, preamp, etc that they engineered and built).
> 
> ...and of course the engineering and factory aren't too bad either.


So in your opinion....for home use, are they worth it? The flange is quite large for a car but in a house that isn't a problem.


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

ItalynStylion said:


> So in your opinion....for home use, are they worth it? The flange is quite large for a car but in a house that isn't a problem.


Are they worth using? Sure they are. However, a driver is only a good as the person who is designing the system. You'll need the right crossover point, frequency, and integration with the rest of the system in order to make it work just like you would with any other driver. But other than that, it sounded fantastic in the setup I heard it in. 

BTW: There isn't a 100% pure beryllium domed tweeter on the face of the planet. All beryllium domes are an alloy and the ones like TB's are fantastic because they have very little impurities. Sure it may only be 4% pure beryllium, but it has almost zero impurities. That's a lot better than having 3% beryllium and 1% impurities.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

I'd like to try these out. I'll let you all know if I do.


----------



## mokedaddy (Feb 26, 2007)

ItalynStylion said:


> I'd like to try these out. I'll let you all know if I do.


Do it!!!


----------



## DanWiggins (Jun 15, 2005)

Anyone interested in trying some XBL ceramic domes? I worked with TB to develop the BeCu units for a large Prosound manufacturer, and also did some ceramic dome XBL units as well. I'd want someone with a pretty revealing system, access to several good ears, and someone who knows better than to try to put 100W through the tweeter (see the first few posts of this thread...).


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

DanWiggins said:


> Anyone interested in trying some XBL ceramic domes? I worked with TB to develop the BeCu units for a large Prosound manufacturer, and also did some ceramic dome XBL units as well. I'd want someone with a pretty revealing system, access to several good ears, and someone who knows better than to try to put 100W through the tweeter (see the first few posts of this thread...).


I'd be interested in giving them a shot. What is the lowest you would think about crossing them over at? Any specs?

There are quite a few of us here in the DFW that would love to hear them.


----------



## DanWiggins (Jun 15, 2005)

YGPM.


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

Hey Steven,

I'd be willing to contribute my Behringer 3-way active xover for testing purposes to the cause. I also have a BG Neo to contribute. Maybe we can get Mark to bring his HiQ out.

Just a suggestion.


----------



## Vigarisa (Dec 10, 2007)

I've got the Ceramic TBs.

Still some burn-in to do, but definitively not a bad tweeter. Will try to put my friend's review of it in here soon


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Awesome. Which ones do you have and how long have you been running them? What frequencies are they running?


----------



## tspence73 (Oct 14, 2008)

Vigarisa said:


> I've got the Ceramic TBs.
> 
> Still some burn-in to do, but definitively not a bad tweeter. Will try to put my friend's review of it in here soon


Which model?


----------



## Vigarisa (Dec 10, 2007)

Parts-Express.com:Tang Band 25-1719S 1" Ceramic Dome Tweeter | Tang Band 25-1719S tang band tb speakers dome tweeter ceramic dome hard dome non-metallic dome

Since I bought them for my audiophile and official tester friend , I am waiting on his replying. So far he told me it's a better tweeter than the good Seas 27TDFC and most morels.


----------



## Vigarisa (Dec 10, 2007)

ItalynStylion said:


> Awesome. Which ones do you have and how long have you been running them? What frequencies are they running?


Link is above. crossed at 3.5K. running for a short period, not ready for a review. 

TB is making some good tweeters nowadays. A fair model that I have used in the past http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-822 Just needed more "air" in the upper notes.

Even the "berillyum" not being the ''pure one", if cheaper, I'd get them too.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

bassfromspace said:


> Hey Steven,
> 
> I'd be willing to contribute my Behringer 3-way active xover for testing purposes to the cause. I also have a BG Neo to contribute. Maybe we can get Mark to bring his HiQ out.
> 
> Just a suggestion.


That would be sweet. Mark and I recently rebuilt the cabinets for those bookshelf speakers so they should be a little more presentable too. 

I'll make a dedicated thread for the tweeters when I receive them. We can have a "tweet-off" and see how a few different kinds compare. Can you post a link to specs for those BG neos? I know there are two that are very similar but I don't know which ones you have.Maybe I could make some small bookshelf cabinets that have a removable tweeter baffle so we can switch them out quickly. If we can get Mir or Joseph to bring their RTA we could REALLY have a good time. 

More on that later....


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

BG Neo Specs

Parts-Express.com:Bohlender Graebener Neo3-PDRW Planar Tweeter w/Back Cup | neo3pdr planar tweeter ribbon tweeter planar transducer


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

bigabe said:


> ^^ Oh snap....
> 
> 
> Now Critical Mass is gonna take those puppies and market them as their new CMAd.25 Adamantium Dome tweeters at a low introductory price of $3999 per tweeter.


....  LOL!!! Scary thing is, I wouldn't doubt it if they tried it. There's a sucker born every second.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

DanWiggins said:


> Anyone interested in trying some XBL ceramic domes? I worked with TB to develop the BeCu units for a large Prosound manufacturer, and also did some ceramic dome XBL units as well. I'd want someone with a pretty revealing system, access to several good ears, and someone who knows better than to try to put 100W through the tweeter (see the first few posts of this thread...).


Dan, is TangBand using an XBL motor for their 25-1719S tweeter?
It's not listed in the specs, but these two look suspiciously similar 

http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1230_04/25-1719s.htm

CeraDome Tweeter


----------



## DanWiggins (Jun 15, 2005)

That's the non-XBL version of what we did. And we did a copper-beryllium domed version for a new high-end prosound monitor.


----------



## Vigarisa (Dec 10, 2007)

Has anyone tried to remove the front cap from the Ceramic TB tweeter? I sounded a lot better in here.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Vigarisa said:


> Has anyone tried to remove the front cap from the Ceramic TB tweeter? I sounded a lot better in here.


I did, it sounded better in the car. Narrower dispersion, got less early reflections, sounds more focused. Wiggins says there will be a 10db spike around 19k doing so, which is why I have mine offaxis in hopes of getting a natural rolloff, which is working out quite well  .


----------



## Hillbilly SQ (Jan 26, 2007)

So me and Mir are running the same tweets minus mine having the longer chamber for lower fs. We also both agreed the adi unit is the perfect tweeter since it will play low without the distortion the tang units have. I couldn't get away with crossing my lower fs versions at 2500 like Mir did...4k at 24db is as low as my ears will let them go. Maybe it's install related and the reflections amplifying everything?Or maybe the 100 miles of distance I have between mids and tweets is too far to be splitting the critical range like that? Or maybe I just like A LOT of air in the sound of my tweetsHigher crossing has always caused this to happen.

Either way I'll be all over the xbl versions like white on rice when they hit the market.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Hillbilly SQ said:


> Either way I'll be all over the xbl versions like white on rice when they hit the market.


Yeah, me too....if it happens


----------



## RyanM923 (May 12, 2007)

Any news on someone OEMing Dan's XBL^2 tweets? I'm dying to have a tweeter that can run a 1.6khz crossover with ease.


----------



## ItalynStylion (May 3, 2008)

Dan and I have been emailing back and fourth about the idea but we really weren't able to gauge how much interest there were in them as of yet. Funny story actually, he emailed me the other day asking if I had the prototypes still because he hadn't heard from me. I was like, "What do you mean, I sent you like a billion emails, I haven't been able to get a hold of you." Long story short; Dan's spam filter owns me...


----------

