# How many of you are running large format tweeters?



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Just wondering, I'm assuming we're in the minority plus I'm interested in others' mounting solutions. Thanks.


----------



## joshchrans (Mar 11, 2012)

I have dash locations for a 4" speakers. Perfect fit for large format tweets, hidden under factory grills.


----------



## niceguy (Mar 12, 2006)

I have been for the last 5 years of so...in the dash opening of my '94 Grand Voyager work van under factory grills. Worked and sounded wonderful and then I got a new Uplander cargo van with no dash openings at all.

In fact I still have a BNIB pair in the closet plus the pair that are still in the van dash sitting and I'll be selling both if anyone's interested. Here's a description as they compare favorably to that little Scanspeak brand lol...

Northcreek OkaraII


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

I am.. pillars in my truck are 6" wide...I aim my Scanspeak AirCircs off axis pretty much at each other.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Victor_inox (Apr 27, 2012)

SoundJunkie said:


> I am.. pillars in my truck are 6" wide...I aim my Scanspeak AirCircs off axis pretty much at each other.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


pictures?


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

Victor_inox said:


> pictures?


Edited my post....gap is from the hole cut for my Audiom TLR's.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

SoundJunkie said:


> I am.. pillars in my truck are 6" wide...I aim my Scanspeak AirCircs off axis pretty much at each other.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


Is that an FJ Cruiser? Are you pretty happy with that setup? My pillars are big for a car and I think I can do pillars with very little tweeter showing from the outside. Mine are the Esotar 110s, usually 4" but they've been cut down to 3.5" to make mounting easier.


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> Is that an FJ Cruiser? Are you pretty happy with that setup? My pillars are big for a car and I think I can do pillars with very little tweeter showing from the outside. Mine are the Esotar 110s, usually 4" but they've been cut down to 3.5" to make mounting easier.


Yes it is. Extremely happy with the setup! If I ever get around to covering them I could hide them completely

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

What would these be classified as format wise? SB Acoustics :: SB26STCN-C000-4


----------



## qwertydude (Dec 22, 2008)

That's not a tweeter, now this is a tweeter. (Said in a comically Australian accent)


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

07azhhr said:


> What would these be classified as format wise? SB Acoustics :: SB26STCN-C000-4


Good question. My tangs are about that size as well. I've heard them considered large format but I would think large format would have at least a 3" cutout.


----------



## NRA4ever (Jul 19, 2010)

I have Morel MDT 12s 1&1/8 " They are small but sound big.


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

What are you qualifying as large? I have 28mm dome tweeters.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

alm001 said:


> What are you qualifying as large? I have 28mm dome tweeters.


It's not the dome size, it's the overall physical size. Chances are if you're wondering if it's a large format it's probably not. Here are the large format tweeters I'm running, you can see they're a bit larger than any small format:




















They're about the same overall size as the 3.5" midranges, 4" in diameter. I'll take a picture of them next to my small format tweeters that came out of the car.


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

Isn't the giant baffle to ease mounting in home audio cabinets?


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

Spyke said:


> Good question. My tangs are about that size as well. I've heard them considered large format but I would think large format would have at least a 3" cutout.


These SB's DO take a 3" cutout so I guess they qualify . I was thinking "what, no option for medium format?" lol :laugh:


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

07azhhr said:


> These SB's DO take a 3" cutout so I guess they qualify . I was thinking "what, no option for medium format?" lol :laugh:


They are 1.8" cutout and 2.8" overall.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Im actually about to purchase my first pair but am stuck between color :/
Black: The Madisound Speaker Store
or
Silver: The Madisound Speaker Store

HELP ME CHOOSE!


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> Im actually about to purchase my first pair but am stuck between color :/
> Black: The Madisound Speaker Store
> or
> Silver: The Madisound Speaker Store
> ...


Get one of each.

I guess that would depend on the interior color of your car.

Idk, The silver one is making me hungry for some reason. I think the color of the phase plug is what is making the decision difficult.


----------



## Lorin (May 5, 2011)

This may be a silly question, but what function does the large format tweeter do that a smaller tweeter doesnt? Lower frequency response? More power handling? Just curious.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Spyke said:


> Get one of each.
> 
> I guess that would depend on the interior color of your car.
> 
> Idk, The silver one is making me hungry for some reason. I think the color of the phase plug is what is making the decision difficult.


theres also an ALL BLACK!!!! i get the same feeling about the silver but i feel like it would be to flashy in a car set up. UGHHHHHH! 1 of each would be cool if you wrapped the silver one's a pillar in black and the other side in white (assuming theyre mounted there.. like a checker theme lol)

*edit* i might just go with the black, i mean if you look at my sig theyre tho only things NOT black. but then again imagine the silver ones in the a pillars wrapped in black suede *drooling*


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> theres also an ALL BLACK!!!! i get the same feeling about the silver but i feel like it would be to flashy in a car set up. UGHHHHHH! 1 of each would be cool if you wrapped the silver one's a pillar in black and the other side in white (assuming theyre mounted there.. like a checker theme lol)


The price doesn't make it much easier.

Yup, I think flashy, as in noticeable, may be a little much in a car environment. Especially given the size of them. Imho, I would go with all black. You'll be forever explaining what the little silver thingy is otherwise. And even worse if you have kids, they love to push buttons.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

Spyke said:


> The price doesn't make it much easier.
> 
> Yup, I think flashy, as in noticeable, may be a little much in a car environment. Especially given the size of them. Imho, I would go with all black. You'll be forever explaining what the little silver thingy is otherwise. And even worse if you have kids, they love to push buttons.


im only 20.. lets hope to god there will be no little SkizeRs pushing them and asking what its for. but all black looks like its missing something :/


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> im only 20.. lets hope to god there will be no little SkizeRs pushing them and asking what its for. but all black looks like its missing something :/


Black with silver plug looks good too. I just think the silver faceplate looks odd imo.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Lets keep this somewhat on topic, the what color tweeter should I buy posts would be better off in the equipment selection forum. 

Thanks for the replies so far, where are you guys putting these tweeters? I'm guessing pillars or kicks, probably not in the dash OEM style? I'm getting ready to take them off the dash and try them in the kicks. While they sound fine in the dash, the stage could be better. I have a feeling I'm going pillars but its hard to velcro these suckers anywhere temporarily.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> Lets keep this somewhat on topic, the what color tweeter should I buy posts would be better off in the equipment selection forum.
> 
> Thanks for the replies so far, where are you guys putting these tweeters? I'm guessing pillars or kicks, probably not in the dash OEM style? I'm getting ready to take them off the dash and try them in the kicks. While they sound fine in the dash, the stage could be better. I have a feeling I'm going pillars but its hard to velcro these suckers anywhere temporarily.


sorry, im having a dilemma over here..

on topic.. A pillars on axis is what im going to try first


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

SkizeR said:


> sorry, im having a dilemma over here..
> 
> on topic.. A pillars on axis is what im going to try first


I hope I didn't come off as rude, I'm just panicking before the dec 1st meet gets here. I just tried mine with them on axis with the driver as far in the corner where the pillar and windshield and dash meet and the stage instantly became more focused with no other changes. I have a feeling pillars are going to be the way to go for me.


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

Spyke said:


> They are 1.8" cutout and 2.8" overall.


Like I said I was wondering where the medium format option was lol. But to be honest it looks like you are basing the format size on the magnet size. That does not seem like it would be feasible since different magnet materials will influence the magnet size. Like these Sb's of mine are using Neo magnets so they do not need a huge magnet.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

07azhhr said:


> Like I said I was wondering where the medium format option was lol. But to be honest it looks like you are basing the format size on the magnet size. That does not seem like it would be feasible since different magnet materials will influence the magnet size. Like these Sb's of mine are using Neo magnets so they do not need a huge magnet.


Hmm, I guess I have medium format as well. I always think of large format as those giant home audio tweeters, and small format as the standard sized car audio 1" dome types.


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> I hope I didn't come off as rude, I'm just panicking before the dec 1st meet gets here. I just tried mine with them on axis with the driver as far in the corner where the pillar and windshield and dash meet and the stage instantly became more focused with no other changes. I have a feeling pillars are going to be the way to go for me.


no lol, but i feel like anywhere other than the pillars just doesnt sound right. idk maybe its just me


----------



## MB2008LTZ (Oct 13, 2012)

Does this qualify?


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

MB2008LTZ said:


> View attachment 40903
> 
> 
> Does this qualify?


what speaker is that? also that a pillar looks beautifullll


----------



## MB2008LTZ (Oct 13, 2012)

SkizeR said:


> what speaker is that? also that a pillar looks beautifullll


Tweeter is Pioneer Premier TS-T3PRS. I have it mated with the TS-M7PRS mid in my doors. Running Pioneer 800PRS head unit active thru Planet Audio hybrid vacuum tube amp HVT-754


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

07azhhr said:


> Like I said I was wondering where the medium format option was lol. But to be honest it looks like you are basing the format size on the magnet size. That does not seem like it would be feasible since different magnet materials will influence the magnet size. Like these Sb's of mine are using Neo magnets so they do not need a huge magnet.


Mine are neo and are still fairly large on diameter. Luckily depth is not too bad. I'm really liking them up in the corner where the dash and pillar and windshield meet. I'm about to call it good and have some pods, something that looks as stock as possible fabbed up.


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

AirCirc neo magnet array!










Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## SkizeR (Apr 19, 2011)

SoundJunkie said:


> AirCirc neo magnet array!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


what model is that? can you post a pic of the front?


----------



## SoundJunkie (Dec 3, 2008)

SkizeR said:


> what model is that? can you post a pic of the front?


Scanspeak Illuminator D3004/660000










They replaced these:









Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> Mine are neo and are still fairly large on diameter. Luckily depth is not too bad. I'm really liking them up in the corner where the dash and pillar and windshield meet. I'm about to call it good and have some pods, something that looks as stock as possible fabbed up.


I am looking forward to seeing pics of this. Those are nice looking drivers in a nice car, it should look really good. 

Mine are certainly on the smaller size for format tweeters and I would not consider them large but they seem a bit big to be called small lol. Perhaps just format then .


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

Spyke said:


> Hmm, I guess I have medium format as well. I always think of large format as those giant home audio tweeters, and small format as the standard sized car audio 1" dome types.


This is my line of thinking as well. But just because the face is large does not always mean that the magnet is also large.

I could be wrong but I would think it is the face size that dictates the format size. But do we even classify the car type domes as format at all? If so then they would be the Small's while our's would be Mediums and Buick's would be Large. If not then our's would be the Smalls and Buick's would still be the Large with no Medium. Hmmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## 07azhhr (Dec 28, 2011)

BuickGN said:


> Thanks for the replies so far, where are you guys putting these tweeters? I'm guessing pillars or kicks, probably not in the dash OEM style? I'm getting ready to take them off the dash and try them in the kicks. While they sound fine in the dash, the stage could be better. I have a feeling I'm going pillars but its hard to velcro these suckers anywhere temporarily.


You may or may not want to do this but when I was working on the angle for my pillars I removed the pillar trim pieces and use 90* angle brackets to mount then to the inner metal of the pillar. I used only 1 hole for each and bent the brackets as needed to try the various angles. I had the speakers mounted in their rings and then attatched to the brackets. 

This is what I ended up with. I compromised a bit of the axis for minimal visual loss out the windshield. Oh and you can see the size of my tweets compared to Hat L3's. The L3's are 93mm wide so just shy of 4".


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

I've run several big format tweets. Vifa DX/XT25, Peerless HDS, Scan 6600 aircirc and Seas 27TG.. something.

Scan 6600 is the best tweeter I've ever used or heard fyi. They'll play down to 1500Hz with ease, I use them in my home audio speakers atm. They are quite pricy though. 

The big format tweets usually have lower Fs and greater power handling and that's probably the main advantage, being able to cross them lower (generally speaking).


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Spyke said:


> They are 1.8" cutout and 2.8" overall.


If you can grind the flange down to mount it in an insanely tiny hole (AKA neo magnet) then it's small format D:


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

chad said:


> If you can grind the flange down to mount it in an insanely tiny hole (AKA neo magnet) then it's small format D:


I guess I'm casting my vote for small format then.
But I'm not happy about it.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

chad said:


> If you can grind the flange down to mount it in an insanely tiny hole (AKA neo magnet) then it's small format D:


Thanks, Mines def not large then, but i've got some pretty good moves that make up for it.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

The mounting hole for mine is 86mm and the top mount depth is 27mm.


----------



## Lorin (May 5, 2011)

I am still curious what the large format brings to the table? Without generalizing too much, tweeters dont usually require huge amounts of power, and 3500 hz seems to be a fairly standard cutoff frequency. To be fair, I am running a 3 way system (h-audio widebanders running from 400-5500), but since they are both in the a-pillars, I am wondering where the benefit is from the larger format? Am I being too general?


----------



## JT34237 (Apr 29, 2010)

Lorin said:


> I am still curious what the large format brings to the table? Without generalizing too much, tweeters dont usually require huge amounts of power, and 3500 hz seems to be a fairly standard cutoff frequency. To be fair, I am running a 3 way system (h-audio widebanders running from 400-5500), but since they are both in the a-pillars, I am wondering where the benefit is from the larger format? Am I being too general?


I would like to know as well.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

I could swear I posted a quote in my last post from a member explaining what the large format is all about. The information is out there, all you have to do is search. Typically better dispersion, play lower, better power handling, rear chamber.

In the case of mine, going from the small format Dyn102 to the large format Dyn 110, the large formats are better in every way they can be better and they extend up much higher with ease. They're more crisp and dynamic, they play low better, just all around better but it's an entirely different and more expensive tweeter so I'm sure the improvements are probably a combo of being large format and just different.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> Typically better dispersion


How? IS this why B&W and many others park the tweet on top with no flange at all? 



BuickGN said:


> play lower


You can boundary load any speaker, even small ones.



BuickGN said:


> better power handling


Gotta cry ******** on this one. IF you are heating up a tweeter motor and flange with longterm power then you are ****ing deaf as hell in a car. Even pro sound drivers won't heat. Many neo drivers simply heatsink the works. For impulse type power handling it IS ******** because the coil will vaporize before it has a chance to conduct heat to the structure that has a MUCH different thermal coefficient.



BuickGN said:


> rear chamber.


You can put a rear chamber on anything, it does not have to have a large diameter magnet to have a chamber, again, proven in countless designs of "floating tweets"


Let's step back for a second and look at a whole line of tweeters. The Vifa XT25.

They make a normal magnet one, a normal magnet one with a bucking magnet, made a big neo one at one point, and they make a small format neo one.

All of these designs incorporate the same dome, nipple, and voice coil. even the ones used in uber high end speakers, same 40-50 dollar tweeter.

So if the flange on the tiny magnet version were expanded with say, a chunk of round wood and it were flush mounted, why WOULD it sound different than the other models providing that the exponentially more powerful per ounce neo magnet is applying the same flux density and geometry to the voice coil that is exactly the same? The tiny magnet neo also incorporates a structure and heat sink that is more likely to match the thermo properties of the voice coil (match as in match a caterpillar earth mover to a Kawasaki quad still).

So if these different varieties of magnet apply the same properties to the voice coil, why would they not sound EXTREMELY similar when run within their capabilities?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

chad said:


> How? IS this why B&W and many others park the tweet on top with no flange at all?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Notice I said "typically" and it was quoted from an old post by Minivanman, not my words. I was trying to avoid any more questions from people too lazy to search. So instead of talking **** why don't you answer the question what does a large format bring to the table.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Lorin said:


> I am still curious what the large format brings to the table? Without generalizing too much, tweeters dont usually require huge amounts of power, and 3500 hz seems to be a fairly standard cutoff frequency. To be fair, I am running a 3 way system (h-audio widebanders running from 400-5500), but since they are both in the a-pillars, I am wondering where the benefit is from the larger format? Am I being too general?


I don't see a huge advantage to a LF tweeter. I would say lower fs but there are too many exceptions to that rule. My small formats have an fs of 800 which is about the same as many lf's. *Assuming* that a Lf can play lower and sound better than a sf, *then* it would be more useful in crossing to a larger midbass. However if you are crossing at or above 3.5k, then you would really have nothing to gain. I cross at 5k-6.3k depending on genre, so technically I could use a 1/2" sf tweet and gain better axis response. So what i'm trying to say is: In my case there would be nothing to gain from a large format. If you needed to cross low then I could see an advantage.


----------



## SUX 2BU (Oct 27, 2008)

Tangband 1" soft-domes I bought almost 10 years ago for $25 each new. I still use them and they sound excellent. They are a Dynaudio D25 clone.









An previous installation in truck, paired with a Rockford Power 4" and a B&W 7" mid. I still use the B&W but made new pods for the tweets and took out the 4".


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> Notice I said "typically" and it was quoted from an old post by Minivanman, not my words. I was trying to avoid any more questions from people too lazy to search. So instead of talking **** why don't you answer the question what does a large format bring to the table.


Look ****er, just because I disagree with what you plagiarized, does not mean I'm talking ****.

I even gave an example of the same tweeter in different formats. So while you are rubbing your two brain cells around that sounding it out you can piss up a ****ing rope.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

chad said:


> Look ****er, just because I disagree with what you plagiarized, does not mean I'm talking ****.
> 
> I even gave an example of the same tweeter in different formats. So while you are rubbing your two brain cells around that sounding it out you can piss up a ****ing rope.


No, you're talking **** ****er. So again, tell us what makes a large format better... ****er. Oh wait, I forgot....... Now it's all ok.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> I don't see a huge advantage to a LF tweeter. I would say lower fs but there are too many exceptions to that rule. My small formats have an fs of 800 which is about the same as many lf's. *Assuming* that a Lf can play lower and sound better than a sf, *then* it would be more useful in crossing to a larger midbass. However if you are crossing at or above 3.5k, then you would really have nothing to gain. I cross at 5k-6.3k depending on genre, so technically I could use a 1/2" sf tweet and gain better axis response. So what i'm trying to say is: In my case there would be nothing to gain from a large format. If you needed to cross low then I could see an advantage.


Same here, I would have to look at the specs again but I believe my small formats had a slightly lower Fs.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> No, you're talking **** ****er. So again, tell us what makes a large format better... ****er. Oh wait, I forgot....... Now it's all ok.


Let's leave the name calling here rat bastard  I was not trying to fire you up anyway. But you sure are fun when you are fired up.

I feel that now that they have the heat issues with neo taken care of that it's really noting more than, on esoteric models, positioning magnets to take advantage of field geometry, as seen in an example earlier. You can also get more volume from a shallow chamber if it has a larger diameter. With the rush on 3 way front stages I sort of feel that having a huge rear chamber is moot in what we are doing. It IS MUCH easier to make a larger hole an mount a larger frame driver, the margin of error is nicer. I think we can both agree with that!

We see the trend in woofers big time in going smaller, for example look at the structure of many of the newer speakers like Dyn and morel, because of the enormous VC they pack a lot of that magnet INSIDE the coil!

So in a home enclosure or in a panel where sight-lines are not an issue I can see using a larger frame driver for ease of use, unless there is not a comparable small frame driver out there that meets the needs, I don't see an advantage in acoustics, if not a hindrance in a car. BUT for example, I like vifa drivers, you like Dyn, I have a a VERY comparable driver that's in a small frame format I can make VERY small with common tools, whereas there is likely not a comparable driver in the lineup for you, so big flange it is.

I don't feel there's a blanket policy to a larger flange because a smaller flange can be extended. I've heard a LOT of larger flange drivers that get smoked by what is out there now in a modern smaller flange driver.

I sorta feel as if I'm repeating what I have already said, except with more words.

So I can't say what makes a larger flange driver better, because in many instances it's simply not. We have the technology to make smaller more powerful magnets that can concentrate a ****ton of energy in a magnetic gap.


----------



## Lorin (May 5, 2011)

I am a bit suprised at the turn my fairly simple question has come to? I wasnt \ am not too lazy to search, and I have been playing around with car audio since the mid 80's. I have ran larger tweeters in years past and now run smaller ones. What I had HOPED to glean was a more thorough explanation from people that have run the more current, large format tweeters in comparisons to their smaller counterparts (I believe you recently moved from a smaller format to a larger one based upon reading your prior post). I "asked" fairly politely both times, and appreciate those that tried to explain, up until the point that it became a diatribe with generic terms about "people too lazy to use the search function." 

Not sure if your tone was intended for me, but not entirely sure how I can not believe that the other comment was directly pointed AT me. Im trying to keep with the DIYMA attitude of "helping", both via asking (when I have a viable question), or answering one if I have something tangible to add. 

In the end, I hope that you get the information you need. Im a bit confused and suprised at the reaction.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

I never mentioned using the search. I have been here since 2005 and a lot has changed since then in drivers.


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

SUX 2BU said:


> Tangband 1" soft-domes I bought almost 10 years ago for $25 each new. I still use them and they sound excellent. They are a Dynaudio D25 clone.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sweet Jesus tell me those are Marvin the Martian floor mats. I have those exact same ones!!!


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

quality_sound said:


> Sweet Jesus tell me those are Marvin the Martian floor mats. I have those exact same ones!!!


I was more impressed with the floor mounted high beam switch.


----------



## Lorin (May 5, 2011)

Chad, I wasnt referring to you in my post. I appreciate your discussion and agree that much has changed in the recent past in regards to technology in tweeters, etc...
My confusion was directed at the statement regarding "people too lazy to search."


----------



## Niebur3 (Jul 11, 2008)

Chad and BuickGN, you both remind me of this clip.....



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJcuiBVznY


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

chad said:


> I was more impressed with the floor mounted high beam switch.


Then you would be really impressed with my Opel GT with a foot pedal manual pump for the windshield washer.



Lorin said:


> I am a bit suprised at the turn my fairly simple question has come to? I wasnt \ am not too lazy to search, and I have been playing around with car audio since the mid 80's. I have ran larger tweeters in years past and now run smaller ones. What I had HOPED to glean was a more thorough explanation from people that have run the more current, large format tweeters in comparisons to their smaller counterparts (I believe you recently moved from a smaller format to a larger one based upon reading your prior post). I "asked" fairly politely both times, and appreciate those that tried to explain, up until the point that it became a diatribe with generic terms about "people too lazy to use the search function."
> 
> Not sure if your tone was intended for me, but not entirely sure how I can not believe that the other comment was directly pointed AT me. Im trying to keep with the DIYMA attitude of "helping", both via asking (when I have a viable question), or answering one if I have something tangible to add.
> 
> In the end, I hope that you get the information you need. Im a bit confused and suprised at the reaction.


If a comparison is what you wanted then I was wrong. To find out the common differences I just googled and came across an old post from here around 2009, the one I quoted that got torn apart. I'm not the best person to ask for a comparison since I've only run one large format.

I did just upgrade from a small format to a large format of the same brand. It's my first large format tweeter so I really don't have much in the way of experience. All I an say is the large format is significantly better in every possible way a tweeter can be better and by a long shot. In fact it's completely transformed the whole system in ways I never thought a tweeter could. While I've tried them for a short while at 2khz just to see how they perform, they've been highpassed from 3,200hz to 4khz mostly and it's still a HUGE difference. It's not really a valid comparison between small and large format, the large format tweeters retail for nearly $1,900 and the small for about $400 I think. So while there's a size difference, the large formats are also a couple steps up the food chain, not just a small format tweeter with a large flange. The most common answers are the ones I gave that got torn apart already. The magnet structure on mine is neo but still quite large. Only 27mm deep but big in diameter. I can't fit even the magnet of the large format in the stock location in the dash that used to house the entire small format tweeter.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> Then you would be really impressed with my Opel GT with a foot pedal manual pump for the windshield washer.


Jesus, I'd crash the car.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

chad said:


> Let's leave the name calling here rat bastard  I was not trying to fire you up anyway. But you sure are fun when you are fired up.
> 
> I feel that now that they have the heat issues with neo taken care of that it's really noting more than, on esoteric models, positioning magnets to take advantage of field geometry, as seen in an example earlier. You can also get more volume from a shallow chamber if it has a larger diameter. With the rush on 3 way front stages I sort of feel that having a huge rear chamber is moot in what we are doing. It IS MUCH easier to make a larger hole an mount a larger frame driver, the margin of error is nicer. I think we can both agree with that!
> 
> ...


I'm rarely completely serious anymore. Half of the stuff I say is to get under your skin with a grin on my face, the other half is slightly annoyed but I never get pissed.

I've heard having the magnet inside of the voice coil can be a good thing, more magnetic force for a given size or something like that. It's not a bad idea though, my midbass have a 4" vc and a very small profile for a 9/10" driver. The Morel 9" is even smaller. I have a hard time cutting on my car so I would probably have never gone with a larger than 6.5" midbass if these two didn't exist.


Even with these tweeters cut down to 3.5" they're still a pain to mount. I think I've settled on a location, just got to figure out how to execute it for the most stock appearance from the outside of the car at least. I get the keys to the house on Saturday, already have most of my crap moved into the garage but it's a bit nerve racking living in an apartment with this system and these big ass tweeters on the dash. I caught a guy checking the car out yesterday in my parking lot and watched him for a while until he tried lifting the door handle. Just a few more days, with my luck the system will get stolen on the last day before I move into the house. This is one advantage a small format has, they're usually invisible from outside.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

chad said:


> Jesus, I'd crash the car.


It's pretty weird. The pedal is the pump, you have actual fluid going into the driver compartment and back out to the squirters. It's also a manual but this was in the days before just about every car had a dead pedal so the pedal/pump is the dead pedal.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

If you ran enough line around the heater area then you could have warmed up bug juice for winter..

Sent from my Sony Tablet S using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Eh... the tweeters ability to sound good ain't determined by the magnet/flange size. My Vifa XT25-sc90 which is a really small driver, which costs like 20$ or something is among the better drivers I've used. They are as good as several top end drivers if you're aware of their limits. My SS 6600 could play one octave lower, but it's not needed in a 3-way front. If you crossing tweeters high, like 5kHz+, harmonic distortion becomes less important, 3rd order HD at 6k will be outside many peoples hearing threshold (just an example). A good frequency response is what's most important. My opinion is that you should try get away with the smallest driver for the least money and install the tweeter on-axis and prioritize the midrange driver instead, often there's not that much room if you're installing at dash level so you can fit both a large flange tweet and a midrange driver... 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Isn't the big flange there to help push diffraction lower in the bandwith? 

Kelvin


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

It really just has to do with supporting a larger motor structure. Therefore, it can be an indicator of lower Fs in most cases. Outside of that, the only benefit of a larger surface area coupled to the emitting source is reinforcement (ie: lowering the baffle step frequency) but really, that's not even a logical argument unless your building a dipole. And I don't know even then if its something dipole builders look for.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> It really just has to do with supporting a larger motor structure. Therefore, it can be an indicator of lower Fs in most cases. Outside of that, the only benefit of a larger surface area coupled to the emitting source is reinforcement (ie: lowering the baffle step frequency) but really, that's not even a logical argument unless your building a dipole. And I don't know even then if its something dipole builders look for.


So is it safe to say that the improvements I've noticed from my large formats that I highpass at 3,200 to 4,500hz is likely due to other things, not the size of the flange? I never really thought the flange made that much difference but some have said it alters dispersion. Apparently the beveled edge on the inside edge of the flange, around the dome is important in dispersion. If I had to guess, these sound like they have less reflections off the windshield when I have them propped up on the dash on axis with the driver. When I tried the small formats like that I didn't see a huge difference over having them facing up firing off the windshield. With the large formats my stage goes from diffused to much more focused.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

.... 

I'll be back.


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

I took a small flange tweeter and made it bigger, does that count?


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Hanatsu said:


> Eh... the tweeters ability to sound good ain't determined by the magnet/flange size. My Vifa XT25-sc90 which is a really small driver, which costs like 20$ or something is among the better drivers I've used. They are as good as several top end drivers if you're aware of their limits. My SS 6600 could play one octave lower, but it's not needed in a 3-way front. If you crossing tweeters high, like 5kHz+, harmonic distortion becomes less important, 3rd order HD at 6k will be outside many peoples hearing threshold (just an example). A good frequency response is what's most important. My opinion is that you should try get away with the smallest driver for the least money and install the tweeter on-axis and prioritize the midrange driver instead, often there's not that much room if you're installing at dash level so you can fit both a large flange tweet and a midrange driver...
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


Agreed. Right of the bat, I will say that i've never liked a tweeter crossed below 4k ish in a car audio environment. I've tried many different brands, sizes, and materials. One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high. Hard dome naturally having more extension than soft. So if your mid is capable of playing high, let it. I've also noticed that the more you can push the tweeter out of the vocal range the less noticeable they become.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> Agreed. Right of the bat, I will say that i've never liked a tweeter crossed below 4k ish in a car audio environment. I've tried many different brands, sizes, and materials. One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high. Hard dome naturally having more extension than soft. So if your mid is capable of playing high, let it. I've also noticed that the more you can push the tweeter out of the vocal range the less noticeable they become.


There's a very large difference in sound above 4khz between my old tweeters and my new tweeters. They sound nothing alike at all with a 4500hz highpass. These soft domes also extend out past 30khz. I didn't like tweeters playing below 4.5khz when facing the windshield but with them not reflecting off the windshield, they sound pretty good crossed lower. I might change the highpass eventually. If I remember right my midranges have the least distortion below 3khz.


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> There's a very large difference in sound above 4khz between my old tweeters and my new tweeters. They sound nothing alike at all with a 4500hz highpass. These soft domes also extend out past 30khz. I didn't like tweeters playing below 4.5khz when facing the windshield but with them not reflecting off the windshield, they sound pretty good crossed lower. I might change the highpass eventually. If I remember right my midranges have the least distortion below 3khz.


Try some shallow slopes and see how you like it.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> Eh... the tweeters ability to sound good ain't determined by the magnet/flange size. My Vifa XT25-sc90 which is a really small driver, which costs like 20$ or something is among the better drivers I've used. They are as good as several top end drivers if you're aware of their limits. My SS 6600 could play one octave lower, but it's not needed in a 3-way front. If you crossing tweeters high, like 5kHz+, harmonic distortion becomes less important, 3rd order HD at 6k will be outside many peoples hearing threshold (just an example). A good frequency response is what's most important. My opinion is that you should try get away with the smallest driver for the least money and install the tweeter on-axis and prioritize the midrange driver instead, often there's not that much room if you're installing at dash level so you can fit both a large flange tweet and a midrange driver...
> 
> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy 3 via Tapatalk.


Keep in mind that frequency response of a raw driver vs the implementation of said driver in a speaker fashion with another driver isn't the same thing. These drivers have radiation patterns which cannot be determined by a single point measurement. 

So, while crossing at 4khz is fine and dandy in terms of FR, how does the system's power response look? 

I'm of a different mindset lately that has me back at crossing lower for this sole reason.

Edit: Good Lord, I can't spell!


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> There's a very large difference in sound above 4khz between my old tweeters and my new tweeters. They sound nothing alike at all with a 4500hz highpass. These soft domes also extend out past 30khz. I didn't like tweeters playing below 4.5khz when facing the windshield but with them not reflecting off the windshield, they sound pretty good crossed lower. I might change the highpass eventually. If I remember right my midranges have the least distortion below 3khz.


Oh for **** sake, do you have to nit pick every freaking thing anyone says.

When I said crossed high, I was meaning more in the 5-6k range and with a steep slope. And yeah, some tweeters are more airy than others so there are some differences. For the most part I think you would be hard pressed to hear a difference between 2 different tweets (of the same material)crossed [email protected]


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

BuickGN said:


> There's a very large difference in sound above 4khz between my old tweeters and my new tweeters. They sound nothing alike at all with a 4500hz highpass.


you're not comparing apples to apples here. you're talking about two totally different drivers. so, it's most likely that one just has a better response in one case. one may have a lower Fs... who knows... 

Your main here is optimizing the response of the two drivers together. If a 4500hz crossover with the right slope does it, great. But you also need to understand that mating two drivers isn't as simple as just picking a crossover point that looks good. I used to pick a point based on distortion only because I was limited by this but now that I've chosen tweeters that can cross lower, I'm realizing a WHOLE lot of lost potential and spent a lot of time massaging the crossover and slope. This is a great advantage of the PS8. You can pick a specific frequency to cross at. Perfect if you find 4khz is too high but 3.15khz is too low and you want a middle ground. This allows you to satisfy a better crossover integration scheme with lessened distortion artifacts from both drivers.



BuickGN said:


> These soft domes also extend out past 30khz.


Can you hear 30khz? Cause about 100% of the population can't. 
Furthermore, any speaker can extend to a point. The question is, where is it at on and off axis. A 12" sub can play to 30khz as well, if you don't quantify it. Playing semantics, but still...


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

Spyke said:


> Agreed. Right of the bat, I will say that i've never liked a tweeter crossed below 4k ish in a car audio environment. I've tried many different brands, sizes, and materials. One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high. Hard dome naturally having more extension than soft. So if your mid is capable of playing high, let it. I've also noticed that the more you can push the tweeter out of the vocal range the less noticeable they become.


Take a look at equal-loudness curves (aka fletcher munsson graphs). Our hearing becomes less sensitive beyond 4kHz or so, at 90phon (~dBs) we are as sensitive to 100Hz as we are to 10kHz. Both LF and HF, like below 100Hz and beyond 10kHz we are not as sensitive as we are to 500-5000Hz, which means there are less chance of hearing distortion in those areas. The midrange are always going to be the most revealing area and therefore we should prioritize that. Also, tall order distortion products in lower midrange is going to end up where we are the most sensitive. A big reason to use the drivers within their intended range. 

The frequencies a typical tweeter produces does not suffer from distortion products ending up in the ear's most sensitive area. Let's say a tweeter is used from 4kHz and up. 2nd harmonic ends up at 8kHz, third at 12kHz. Based on my own experience, distortion does not matter much that end up above 10kHz. I had a tweeter with a pretty nasty 3rd order peak at 5kHz - like 4-5% at 95dB or so. To my surprise it didn't sound bad at all, had a certain "airyness" to it compared to the others I tried. 

What we hear is the power response of the driver, so dispersion pattern and install location matters very much when it comes to tweeters. Ring radiators like the XT25 have worse off-axis response - which is a good thing when installed on-axis. We don't want great dispersion in a car since it only causes early reflections from windows and such. The Scan r3004-662000 have a terrible off-axis response above 4khz. In the car the frequency response will be more predictable and it will sound more focused, it's all because of the ring radiator design, not so much the high-end product.

I don't pay much attention to HD graphs on tweeters above 5kHz anymore, don't think there's much audible non-linear distortion from tweeters anyway at normal listening levels. Usually they are like 10-15dB below subs-mids and if we're listening at 95dB while driving we're not really feeding much power to them, take a look at Zaphs HD-graphs and you'll see that almost all tweeters are well below 1% at 90dB/1m - that's effectively inaudible. IMD could be an issue in some designs, but if there's not much tall order HD, IMD usually stays low.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

bikinpunk said:


> Keep in mind that frequency response of a raw driver vs the implementation of said driver in a speaker fashion with another driver isn't the same thing. These drivers have radiation patterns which cannot be determined by a single point measurement.
> 
> So, while crossing at 4khz is fine and dandy in terms of FR, how does the system's power response look?
> 
> ...


Indeed.

By using ring radiators, we can use it's bad dispersion to an advantage and attain an acceptable power response beyond it's "optimal dispersion pattern". That my reason for not cross them lower than necessary


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> Indeed.
> 
> By using ring radiators, we can use *it's bad dispersion* to an advantage and attain an *acceptable power response* beyond it's "optimal dispersion pattern". That my reason *for not cross them lower than necessary*


these seem contradictory.

You can't have bad dispersion _and _good power response. By definition, power response is tied to polar response and at the crossover of two drivers. 

To achieve good power response you have to match polars as best as possible which often means crossing a tweeter lower than normal because most folks use a midrange that is beaming before the typical crossover points used (ie: 4khz as a crossover point while the 4" mid is already beaming at 2khz). If you have bad dispersion at one then it affects power response. Of course, if you're talking just the tweeter then it's not matched to anything (unless you use a super tweeter) but you still have polar response up high to consider; tweeters beam too so you want even dispersion. 

Another example is with the Scan 10f, which, IMO has one of the best response curves for a midrange and is the best bang for the buck I've come across yet. It's diameter is more along the lines of 3.5". If following typical crossover fashion of 4khz, you're about 4dB apart from 0 and 60 degrees. This would be a case where 4khz might be alright but that's the highest I'd push it.


----------



## SUX 2BU (Oct 27, 2008)

quality_sound said:


> Sweet Jesus tell me those are Marvin the Martian floor mats. I have those exact same ones!!!


Sadly no, they are just Chevrolet mats, but I know the ones you speak of and they are the same brand. I had rear Marvin the Martian mats in a previous car for a while.

The truck is an 85 Chevy C10 short-wide that is my weekend warrior and nice day driver.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

bikinpunk said:


> (ie: 4khz as a crossover point while the 4" mid is already beaming at 2khz).


Is this right? I always thought that even a 6" mid didn't beam til 2.5k.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Spyke said:


> Is this right?


Yes. Beaming isn't an on/off thing. It's gradual. The common rule of thumb is to divide speed of sound by surface diameter of a driver and that provides the beaming point but its not really accurate. In that case, a 6.5" driver with closer to 6" surface area would be said to be beam at 2.25khz. Which is partly correct. However, drivers begin beaming before that exact frequency. It's actually closer to 1/2 to 1/4 wavelength of the driver diameter. In this case, 1/2 wavelength would mean the driver is beaming at 1.125khz. If you get really off axis (say, > 90 degrees) you see the driver is beaming even lower. An example can be found here:
http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.co...canspeak-18w/8434g00-discovery-6.5-midwoofer/


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Hmm. Never thought about it like that. Ever hear an actual click in your brain?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Not over all that talking going on up there! Shut up, voices!


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

bikinpunk said:


> these seem contradictory.
> 
> You can't have bad dispersion _and _good power response. By definition, power response is tied to polar response and at the crossover of two drivers.
> .


Ain't power response the sum of on-axis and off-axis response or have I misinterpreted that? Wasn't aware that we need to count in multiple drivers to calculate it.

My reasoning; If there's not much off-axis response which reach our ears then the on-axis response becomes close to the summed off/on-axis response (which I refer to as power response).


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Hanatsu said:


> Ain't power response the sum of on-axis and off-axis response or have I misinterpreted that? Wasn't aware that we need to count in multiple drivers to calculate it.


Think you're talking about sound power averaging. 

Edit: added a word

Sound power still factors in the detrimental effect of beaming. If a crossover is designed poorly and the result is a speaker with a hole in the response, that hole is present in every axis of measurement. So maybe were both talking about the same thing but different aspects. 


There's also te directivity index.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

bikinpunk said:


> Think you're talking about sound power.


Mmhm


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

bikinpunk said:


> Not over all that talking going on up there! Shut up, voices!


Yup. Those people can get pretty rowdy.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> you're not comparing apples to apples here. you're talking about two totally different drivers. so, it's most likely that one just has a better response in one case. one may have a lower Fs... who knows...
> 
> Your main here is optimizing the response of the two drivers together. If a 4500hz crossover with the right slope does it, great. But you also need to understand that mating two drivers isn't as simple as just picking a crossover point that looks good. I used to pick a point based on distortion only because I was limited by this but now that I've chosen tweeters that can cross lower, I'm realizing a WHOLE lot of lost potential and spent a lot of time massaging the crossover and slope. This is a great advantage of the PS8. You can pick a specific frequency to cross at. Perfect if you find 4khz is too high but 3.15khz is too low and you want a middle ground. This allows you to satisfy a better crossover integration scheme with lessened distortion artifacts from both drivers.
> 
> ...


The 30khz thing was in rebuttal to a previous post stating metal domes extend farther than soft domes. Same about the higher crossover point. One guy said all tweeters sound the same above 4khz.

I've been reading that some people believe >20khz has an effect on people even if you can't hear it, sort of like 10hz bass. It doesn't do much good when your equipment can only go to 20khz along with the recording. I've read some arguments that tweeters that extend well past 20khz typically have a flatter response up to 20khz. In my case, the new tweeters are much more detailed and sensitive in the upper frequencies. With the old tweeters if I wanted to hear a difference in the 16khz range I had to boost in 3db increments. With these I can hear a difference with a very small boost.

I believe it is an apples to oranges comparison as I said before, not really fair to do a small vs large format comparison with these two as they're very different tweeters in more than just the size.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> Oh for **** sake, do you have to nit pick every freaking thing anyone says.
> 
> When I said crossed high, I was meaning more in the 5-6k range and with a steep slope. And yeah, some tweeters are more airy than others so there are some differences. For the most part I think you would be hard pressed to hear a difference between 2 different tweets (of the same material)crossed [email protected]


Trust me, you can hear a pretty good difference even at 6khz between the two soft domes I've run recently but the current one in particular is slightly better than your average tweeter. Maybe most tweeters of the same material sound about the same with a high highpass but definitely not all of them. These tweeters really opened my eyes to how much differently they can sound and what I've been missing out on for years. I highly suggest you get a set of these tweeters and I promise you, you will agree with me.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> One guy said all tweeters sound the same above 4khz.






spyke said:


> One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high.





spyke said:


> When I said crossed high, I was meaning more in the 5-6k range and with a steep slope





spyke said:


> some tweeters are more airy than others so there are some differences


I said that?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Spyke said:


> I said that?


You talking ****?


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

chad said:


> You talking ****?


You're next chad. ..................................................................................................................................


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Spyke said:


> You're next chad. ..................................................................................................................................


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

chad said:


>


rotfl..


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Yup the first time I saw it I was Meh, the second Time I rolled.

Came from here, great site.

Silly gifs of animals being jerks.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> I said that?


Do I really have to go over this? The only thing you said at the time I called you on it was "one thing I've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high". You added the other stuff after I called you on it once you started backtracking. No, not all tweeters of the same material sound the same even from 6k and up. You added the airy part later and even that's not completely right because there can be more differences between tweeters crossed high. Thats why I suggested you take a listen to one of these tweeters so you will know what I'm talking about.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

Ever though about perusing a law degree?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

chad said:


> Ever though about perusing a law degree?


No offense to Matt, but Jay would chew him up, spit him out, set him on fire, piss on him, pour chocolate on him, and eat him again just to chew him up and spit him out again. Only while wearing a bib to avoid staining his bespoke shirt, of course.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> No offense to Matt, but Jay would chew him up, spit him out, set him on fire, piss on him, pour chocolate on him, and eat him again just to chew him up and spit him out again. Only while wearing a bib to avoid staining his bespoke shirt, of course.


Who the **** is jay and why would I care about a law degree.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> Who the **** is jay and why would I care about a law degree.












Dude.... it's awesome when it happens. A Mark/vs/Jay POST can take a day to read.

FWIW I still sort-of keep in touch with Jay, he's doing very well.

As many of us, especially now, he's not much into car audio.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

BuickGN said:


> Who the **** is jay and why would I care about a law degree.


You're better off not knowing. Lol. 

(he's a guy who loves to argue and is really good at it... And even when he's wrong you'll never be able to keep up with his mutiquotes to reply. Oh, he's a lawyer. DS-21)


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

chad said:


> Dude.... it's awesome when it happens.
> 
> FWIW I still sort-of keep in touch with Jay, he's doing very well.
> 
> As many of us, especially now, he's not much into car audio.


He's still around... pissing people off on tech talk.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> You're better off not knowing. Lol.
> 
> (he's a guy who loves to argue and is really good at it... And even when he's wrong you'll never be able to keep up with his mutiquotes to reply. Oh, he's a lawyer. DS-21)


I remember him, hated him, I was a lurker back then. I admit when I'm wrong, just look at the PS8 thread. If you were referencing Spykes post earlier, go back and look at the chronological order assuming he hasn't edited his posts and you will see that I was not wrong. Do I continue arguing when I shouldn't just to get under people's skin, yep. And I'm not the only one.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> I admit when I'm wrong, just look at the PS8 thread.


You know, we should talk about that some time.

I really did not open up because good enough is good enough.

But I have a good explanation for you as to why what happened.. happened. I'd rather not re-hash it over and over again... I'll provide some links I did here earlier. I should probably re-check the links from those threads form WAY back.

We should do it in the chatroom if it still exists, because it's easier that way.

I don't hate you, I just think you are an *******. 

But sometimes, that's what makes **** work.

I have a decent holiday break, wanna go?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

bikinpunk said:


> He's still around... pissing people off on tech talk.


We chose to keep in touch outside of audio.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> I remember him, hated him, I was a lurker back then. *I admit when I'm wrong*, just look at the PS8 thread. If you were referencing Spykes post earlier, go back and look at the chronological order assuming he hasn't edited his posts and you will see that I was not wrong. Do I continue arguing when I shouldn't just to get under people's skin, yep. And I'm not the only one.


Doesn't happen very often then coz I don't think I've ever read anything like that  

Kelvin


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

BuickGN said:


> I admit when I'm wrong, just look at the PS8 thread. If you were referencing Spykes post earlier, go back and look at the chronological order assuming he hasn't edited his posts and you will see that I was not wrong. Do I continue arguing when I shouldn't just to get under people's skin, yep. And I'm not the only one.


Did you think I was talking about you?


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

bikinpunk said:


> Did you think I was talking about you?


You were talking ****.

You can piss up a rope too.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I was talking a out not sing able to win against Jay. No one. He drowns you in multiquotes. 

Buncha damn girls. And that's coming from a guy with a girls name... And spelled like it to boot!

(Now I'm talking ****)


----------



## quality_sound (Dec 25, 2005)

Where is the rope everyone is pissing on? I feel so left out.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

subwoofery said:


> Doesn't happen very often then coz I don't think I've ever read anything like that
> 
> Kelvin


Thank you.



bikinpunk said:


> Did you think I was talking about you?


Nope. I had no idea who or what you were talking about but you usually don't talk **** and when you do it's usually in a way that the person has no idea or even thanks you for it.:laugh:


chad said:


> You were talking ****.
> 
> You can piss up a rope too.


How exactly is this done?



bikinpunk said:


> I was talking a out not sing able to win against Jay. No one. He drowns you in multiquotes.
> 
> Buncha damn girls. And that's coming from a guy with a girls name... And spelled like it to boot!
> 
> (Now I'm talking ****)


I dated a girl, Erin Wilson. She might come up on Google, I haven't tried to search for her yet. Craziest psycho chick I've ever dated or even known for that matter. She ended up dating a well known celebrity after me and left him nearly broke just like she did me. I kind of think of her when I see your name.

You've laid down the challenge now I have to take it. Problem is I'm usually on my phone after work hours so that's not realistic even on the best phone ever made, my iPhone 5 (talking ****). On one of the other boards I frequent where I actually know what I'm talking about, I've been known to drown several people at once in multi quotes. I think I can do this.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Just out of curiosity since this is already off topic... The three of you that aren't running a dome tweeter, what are you running and why. And if you talk **** I have plenty of rope.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> How exactly is this done?


Takes practice, hang a rope, start practicing. Soak the rope.

If you can piss 6 feet in the air, straight up, without getting wet, you are welcome for challenge pissing.....

Big Bill Hell's - YouTube


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

BuickGN said:


> Just out of curiosity since this is already off topic... The three of you that aren't running a dome tweeter, what are you running and why. And if you talk **** I have plenty of rope.


I run rings somewhat off axis. so... 4, unless you searched.


----------



## chad (Jun 30, 2005)

And as for girls names.. Erin is NOT ERIN on my cell phone. 

My wife would be hot.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> Just out of curiosity since this is already off topic... The three of you that aren't running a dome tweeter, what are you running and why. And if you talk **** I have plenty of rope.


Sold my other car (had Focal inverted dome) so I only have Image Dynamic's CD1e v.3 horns in one and stock in the second car  

Kelvin


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> Just out of curiosity since this is already off topic... The three of you that aren't running a dome tweeter, what are you running and why. And if you talk **** I have plenty of rope.


One of the votes it me.. Ring radiator, XT25 small format tweeter in a big home...


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

chad said:


> And as for girls names.. Erin is NOT ERIN on my cell phone.
> 
> My wife would be hot.


What does it say, Bikinipunk?  



douggiestyle said:


> now let's see a picture of you in a bikini?
> 
> 
> chefhow said:
> ...


B.t.w. it's amazing how much hits you get on searching Bikinipunk :surprised:


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

There's some photo hops out there...

I'm Irish! Buncha racist jerks!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bikinpunk said:


> There's some photo hops out there...
> 
> I'm Irish! Buncha racist jerks!


So am I although one member called me a guido.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> Do I really have to go over this? The only thing you said at the time I called you on it was "one thing I've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high". You added the other stuff after I called you on it once you started backtracking. No, not all tweeters of the same material sound the same even from 6k and up. You added the airy part later and even that's not completely right because there can be more differences between tweeters crossed high. Thats why I suggested you take a listen to one of these tweeters so you will know what I'm talking about.


Really? There was no back tracking on my part. I really don't feel like you *called* me on anything. And my last post was in defense of an outright lie you said to Bikinpunk about me.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> One guy said all tweeters sound the same above 4khz.


This is is what i'm talking about. You pulled this out of your ass. What was that you said about being able to admit your mistakes?


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

In other news, I taped some cardboard circles to my tweeter flanges. How do I change my vote?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> Agreed. Right of the bat, I will say that i've never liked a tweeter crossed below 4k ish in a car audio environment. *I've tried many different brands, sizes, and materials. One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high.* Hard dome naturally having more extension than soft. So if your mid is capable of playing high, let it. I've also noticed that the more you can push the tweeter out of the vocal range the less noticeable they become.





Spyke said:


> This is is what i'm talking about. You pulled this out of your ass. What was that you said about being able to admit your mistakes?


Really? There it is in your own words that they all sound the same with the exception being that hard domes have a higher extension. I countered that not all hard domes have a higher extension, my soft domes go past 30khz and they're almost flat out to 20khz or more. I'm not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, only that your statement is probably true most of the time but not all of the time. 

Some tweeters sound great in the vocal range. Again, next time you're in the market for tweeters, try these and you'll see what I'm talking about. I would have no problem running them well into the vocal range. When they were on the dash firing up into the windsield they sounded better crossed over higher, 4,500 and up. Now that I've moved them I've played them down to 2khz and they sound great. I'll probably end up with a highpass in the 3khz to 3.8khz range but who knows.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> BuickGN said:
> 
> 
> > One guy said all tweeters sound the same above 4khz.
> ...


I said "one guy". What makes you think I'm talking about you?


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Because* you* said that in defense of something *you *said about *me*. Who else would you have been talking about? *If* you can *honestly* say that you were talking about someone else then this is a moot argument. So what's it gonna be?


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> Because* you* said that in defense of something *you *said about *me*. Who else would you have been talking about? *If* you can *honestly* say that you were talking about someone else then this is a moot argument. So what's it gonna be?


No, I was talking about you and you knew it because it fit what you said.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

spyke said:


> I've tried many different brands, sizes, and materials. One thing i've noticed is that they all sound similar when crossed high. Hard dome naturally having more extension than soft.





BuickGN said:


> Really? There it is in your own words that they all sound the same with the exception being that hard domes have a higher extension. I countered that not all hard domes have a higher extension, my soft domes go past 30khz and they're almost flat out to 20khz or more. I'm not saying this is a good thing or a bad thing, only that your statement is probably true most of the time but not all of the time.


That doesn't look like this


BuickGN said:


> One guy said all tweeters sound the same above 4khz.





BuickGN said:


> Some tweeters sound great in the vocal range. Again, next time you're in the market for tweeters, try these and you'll see what I'm talking about. I would have no problem running them well into the vocal range. When they were on the dash firing up into the windsield they sounded better crossed over higher, 4,500 and up. Now that I've moved them I've played them down to 2khz and they sound great. I'll probably end up with a highpass in the 3khz to 3.8khz range but who knows.


1. hard domes are usually flatter higher up (with exceptions)
2. Most tweeters of the same material and (price range) will sound similar when crossed above [email protected](Unless they are BuicksGN's magic Large format tweeters that are worlds above any other tweeters that can extend higher and flatter than any hard dome)

Better?


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

What's this, are you guy's practicing the "Jay" skills? Or are we still talking tweeters here . By the way, the XT extends to about 40 Khz on axis, too bad my hearing doesn't .


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> 1. hard domes are usually flatter higher up (with exceptions)
> There you go!
> 
> 2. Most tweeters of the same material and (price range) will sound similar when crossed above [email protected](Unless they are BuicksGN's magic Large format tweeters that are worlds above any other tweeters that can extend higher and flatter than any hard dome)


That's fine but realize you added material, price range, and a highpass of [email protected] after the original post stating *"they all sound similar when crossed high". * I'm waiting for that number to go up to 10khz and then 16khz. If I remember right it started at "crossed high" then 4-5khz and now it's at 6.3khz. 

Why are you debating how high they play? Here's the specs of the old and the new. Old are the 102, new are the 110. Looking at the FR does not begin to show just how differently they sound. http://www.dynaudio.com/int/pdf/DYN_Automotive_Brochure_INT.pdf

Have you ever thought that maybe you've never heard any good tweeters and maybe that's why they all sound the same with a high highpass? Maybe you have hearing loss in the upper frequencies, many people do. My tweeters are definitely one of the best out there but I'm sure there are plenty others in which you can hear a difference above 6.3khz.


----------



## trojan fan (Nov 4, 2007)

BuickGN said:


> Maybe you have hearing loss in the upper frequencies, many people do.


I seem to experience a good amount of hearing loss when the old lady starts to yell at me....


----------



## OSN (Nov 19, 2008)

I can't hear a lick over 15 kHz, but I can feel it. :laugh:


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

trojan fan said:


> I seem to experience a good amount of hearing loss when the old lady starts to yell at me....


Selective hearing loss FTW.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> That's fine but realize you added material, price range, and a highpass of [email protected] after the original post stating *"they all sound similar when crossed high". * I'm waiting for that number to go up to 10khz and then 16khz. If I remember right it started at "crossed high" then 4-5khz and now it's at 6.3khz.


I can read just as well as you can. I apparently have a better memory as well since I originally said 5-6k. The 4k thing was when I said, that's as low as I usually like to cross. I also stated in the original post that the difference between hard and soft domes was noticeable.


BuickGN said:


> Why are you debating how high they play? Here's the specs of the old and the new. Old are the 102, new are the 110. Looking at the FR does not begin to show just how differently they sound. http://www.dynaudio.com/int/pdf/DYN_Automotive_Brochure_INT.pdf


I'm not debating how high they play. Hard domes will play flat higher than soft domes *in general*. Do you disagree with that? 


BuickGN said:


> Have you ever thought that maybe you've never heard any good tweeters and maybe that's why they all sound the same with a high highpass? Maybe you have hearing loss in the upper frequencies, many people do. My tweeters are definitely one of the best out there but I'm sure there are plenty others in which you can hear a difference above 6.3khz.


Between a $5 soft dome and a $50 soft dome the difference is minimal. I honestly have not heard a $500 tweeter so maybe there is a dollar amount that needs to be reached before good sound can be had. And i'm not being sarcastic in that last statement. And my hearing is fine as per my last test.


----------



## Hanatsu (Nov 9, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> Looking at the FR does not begin to show just how differently they sound.


Didn't you move the tweeters when you changed to the new ones? Both frequency response and distortion profile are altered by reflections (the car itself). Unless the speakers were installed in the same location with the same tuning applied any changes might be related to the install/tuning itself. All the audible differences lies in the distortion profile, either linear or non-linear. Which is the most audible form is still open for debate, but HD becomes decreasingly important with higher frequencies simply because the distortion is pronounced increasingly in frequency until a point where it becomes inaudible.

Btw, the Esotar 110 have a pretty high Fs for such a large speaker, check the impedance graph. Wouldn't run any tweeter too close to resonance.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Hanatsu said:


> Didn't you move the tweeters when you changed to the new ones? Both frequency response and distortion profile are altered by reflections (the car itself). Unless the speakers were installed in the same location with the same tuning applied any changes might be related to the install/tuning itself. All the audible differences lies in the distortion profile, either linear or non-linear. Which is the most audible form is still open for debate, but HD becomes decreasingly important with higher frequencies simply because the distortion is pronounced increasingly in frequency until a point where it becomes inaudible.
> 
> Btw, the Esotar 110 have a pretty high Fs for such a large speaker, check the impedance graph. Wouldn't run any tweeter too close to resonance.


I started with the 110 in the same location as the 102 and after about 2 weeks I moved them to a different location but a location I had tried the 102s in for a short time. 

The Fs of the 102 is around 1,300hz if I remember right, stated FR is from 2,200hz I believe. I've run them at 2khz/24db for a few weeks when my midranges were gone and I noticed no problems. I'm not too worried since they're in a 3-way.


----------



## mkeets (Oct 6, 2011)

Spyke said:


> Between a $5 soft dome and a $50 soft dome the difference is minimal. I honestly have not heard a $500 tweeter so maybe there is a dollar amount that needs to be reached before good sound can be had.


I guess so :laugh:

Man every single one of BuickGN's threads end in this he said she said multi-quote war zone :gossip:


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

mkeets said:


> I guess so :laugh:
> 
> Man every single one of BuickGN's threads end in this he said she said multi-quote war zone :gossip:


I thought the tone stayed pretty relaxed. No feelings got hurt anyway.


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

Spyke said:


> I thought the tone stayed pretty relaxed. No feelings got hurt anyway.


I think you should try some expensive tweeters though, at least once .


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Wesayso said:


> I think you should try some expensive tweeters though, at least once .


Ok,* now* my feelings are hurt.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> I thought the tone stayed pretty relaxed. No feelings got hurt anyway.


I cried myself to sleep last night.


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

Spyke said:


> Ok,* now* my feelings are hurt.


I tried some 180 euro tweeters... but I payed only 30 for them .
(yes they were real)


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Wesayso said:


> I tried some 180 euro tweeters... but I payed only 30 for them .
> (yes they were real)


Euro tweeters huh? Sound fancy.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

BuickGN said:


> I cried myself to sleep last night.


At least you got to sleep. I was up all night holding a shotgun and trying to figure out where bakersfield is.


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

Wesayso said:


> I tried some 180 euro tweeters... but I payed only 30 for them .
> (yes they were real)


WHERE DID YOU FIT 180 TWEETERS?


----------



## OSN (Nov 19, 2008)

You would need a magic bus for something like that.


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

Spyke said:


> Euro tweeters huh? Sound fancy.


So you heard them?  they did sound fancy!


----------



## Wesayso (Jul 20, 2010)

alm001 said:


> WHERE DID YOU FIT 180 TWEETERS?


Think like this:









:laugh:


----------



## alm001 (Feb 13, 2010)

Wesayso said:


> Think like this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I could fit that in my car...

edit: How do I not be a "DIYMA freshman"? 96jimmyslt was a senior member, or a moderator, and I'm a freshman?!


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

Spyke said:


> At least you got to sleep. I was up all night holding a shotgun and trying to figure out where bakersfield is.


I'm watching you...


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

alm001 said:


> If I could fit that in my car...
> 
> edit: How do I not be a "DIYMA freshman"? 96jimmyslt was a senior member, or a moderator, and I'm a freshman?!


Do what I do. Post a whole ass load of half truths and opinions and get in arguments a lot. Religious debates are gold mines.

And jimmy wasn't a moderator, although i'm sure he told people he was.


----------



## Spyke (Apr 20, 2012)

Wesayso said:


> So you heard them?  they did sound fancy!


Indeed. 

I may have to peruse the classified section on here. I'm a little iffy about used speakers but I would tend to trust most people on here. I'm happy with what I have for right now.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

You're going to have to argue more in the regular sections, not off topic if you want to bring your post count up.


----------



## cobraa (Dec 4, 2009)

IM running the 2 inch cdto2 tweeter, is this considered large?


----------

