# Are there big differences between scanspeak illuminator D3004/602010 and D3004/602000



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

As the title says are there big differences between the scanspeak illuminator D3004/602010 and D3004/602000 tweeters? I can fit the larger one but not sure if that's the best choice. Feel free to move question this to dumb ass section or where ever. Just curious if anyone has any advice.
Thanks.


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

goodstuff said:


> As the title says are there big differences between the scanspeak illuminator D3004/602010 and D3004/602000 tweeters? I can fit the larger one but not sure if that's the best choice. Feel free to move question this to dumb ass section or where ever. Just curious if anyone has any advice.
> Thanks.


Anyone? BUeller?


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

Well I have never had the pleasure of listening to the D3004/602010. It does have a lower FS and I would expect it to play lower with less distortion and stress. However the charts see to show it is worse off axis above 10K than the D3004/602000. Not sure why. 

In limited testing I really love my D3004/602000 but I am planning on a 3-way which makes low freq performance a non-issue for me. For a 2-way the D3004/602010 may be a better choice. 

Due to the price of these tweeters there are probably only a small number of people who have been able to compare them head to head.


----------



## kyheng (Jan 31, 2007)

When choosing a tweeter, what I will see is, frequency response after 10K.
Best go for a 3-way front setup. But when you go for this, you will have more time to get the midrange right.


----------



## Hernan (Jul 9, 2006)

A question about these tw.
Are they overkill at a car install or they quality deserves the extra cash?
I'm using the TB ceramics and they do a lot of things well but they are a bit harsh sometimes. A used to have silk domes and the sound softer, without any sibilance and with more than enought "air". 
One comment on the ceramics, they are incredible sensitive and plays low with composture.


----------



## IBcivic (Jan 6, 2009)

Hernan said:


> One comment on the ceramics, they are incredible sensitive and plays low with composture.



straight from wiki>> (noun ) composture (plural compostures)
Compost, composted manure.:laugh:


----------



## Hernan (Jul 9, 2006)

amitaF said:


> straight from wiki>> (noun ) composture (plural compostures)
> Compost, composted manure.:laugh:


I'm sorry if it's not the right word. English is not my language and I try to do my best.


----------



## IBcivic (Jan 6, 2009)

YEAH, I KNOW....was too hard to resist. funny how the typo turned out to mean ''mierda''


----------



## kyheng (Jan 31, 2007)

Hernan : This is Scanspeak, you can't go wrong much with them. But sometimes because of the price tag, people with limited budget will stay away from them. Even Alpine F#1 speakers are using Scanspeak speakers.


----------



## Hernan (Jul 9, 2006)

kyheng said:


> Hernan : This is Scanspeak, you can't go wrong much with them. But sometimes because of the price tag, people with limited budget will stay away from them. Even Alpine F#1 speakers are using Scanspeak speakers.


I know that. But... How about the SB Acoustics? Less cash, good reviews...


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

Hernan said:


> I know that. But... How about the SB Acoustics? Less cash, good reviews...


http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/product-selection-comparisons/70580-sb-acoustics-sb29rdcn-morel-mt-23-a-2.html#post1044042

Been there, done that.


----------



## jimbno1 (Apr 14, 2008)

The SB is about 1/2" larger diameter which may be an issue. If I did not already have several nice tweeters I would certainly give the SB an audition. At ~1/3 the price of the Scans it is certainly a serious contender. 

I am really surprised SB does not get more play here. They seem to have some really nicely designed speakers for good prices. I have read a review that the 6.5 is a little weak on midbass, but lots of things could contribute to that.


----------



## kyheng (Jan 31, 2007)

Hernan : Well, reviews won't be accurate anyway as that's personal subjective preference. I've yet to see there's review done objectively. 
Best is use your ear to decide(since it is cheap for SB Acoustics). But what I can say is, European speakers(especially comes with raw drivers), you are getting what you are paying for them.


----------



## snaimpally (Mar 5, 2008)

I have owned both the 3/4" and 1" Scan Illums. The 3/4" were mounted on my A-pillars. The 1" are mounted in my sail panels. I ran the 3/4" Scans for about 4-5 months. I then had the Seas Rt27F for a few months before getting the 1" Scans. Sound-wise there is very little difference between the 3/4" and 1". They are some of the best tweeters I have ever heard. Excellent imaging, smooth response. If you are space constrained, get the 3/4" but if you have the room, go for the 1".

You can buy and try lots of cheaper tweeters and end up spending more money overall. Skip all of it and just get the Scan Illums. You won't be disappointed.


----------



## snaimpally (Mar 5, 2008)

jimbno1 said:


> I am really surprised SB does not get more play here. They seem to have some really nicely designed speakers for good prices. I have read a review that the 6.5 is a little weak on midbass, but lots of things could contribute to that.


SB is a relatively new company, only 2.5 years old, formed by ex-Scan designers when Tympany bought Scanspeak. They have been producing some nice products but the products are relatively new so people have not had a chance to try them all out.


----------



## snaimpally (Mar 5, 2008)

*2-way vs 3-way*

I much prefer the simplicity of a good 2-way. There is less to go wrong - fewer crossovers, fewer amps, fewer cables. The best way to do a 2-way is to get a tweeter with a low Fs that can be crossed low (2-3khz). Dyn, Morel, and Scan tweeters, as well as many others fit this criteria.


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

snaimpally said:


> SB is a relatively new company, only 2.5 years old, formed by ex-Scan designers when Tympany bought Scanspeak. They have been producing some nice products but the products are relatively new so people have not had a chance to try them all out.


I had some sb tweets and they died in the heat after a week in my car. I loved how they sounded though and they played way low and did fun things to the imaging. Madisound refunded my money and I got the scans with the larger chamber. Been working on something to make them fit on the dash.


----------



## s4turn (Jun 17, 2009)

hmm I have sb29 neos as well
However I just ordered some scan 2004's smaller chambered ones, cant wait to hook them up


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

snaimpally said:


> I have owned both the 3/4" and 1" Scan Illums. The 3/4" were mounted on my A-pillars. The 1" are mounted in my sail panels. I ran the 3/4" Scans for about 4-5 months. I then had the Seas Rt27F for a few months before getting the 1" Scans. Sound-wise there is very little difference between the 3/4" and 1". They are some of the best tweeters I have ever heard. Excellent imaging, smooth response. If you are space constrained, get the 3/4" but if you have the room, go for the 1".
> 
> You can buy and try lots of cheaper tweeters and end up spending more money overall. Skip all of it and just get the Scan Illums. You won't be disappointed.


Scan-Speak Illuminator D3004/6020-10 Tweeter


* 1" Soft Dome
* Deep Chamber
* Ring Neodymium Magnet
* Aluminum Face Plate and Chamber
* Protective Grill
* 61.9mm (2.44") diameter flange with 55.4mm (2.18") depth
* Excellent choice for both home hi-fi and autosound applications where depth is not an issue

The Illuminator tweeters continue on with the heritage of the renowned Revelator D29. The large-roll surround and textile dome diaphragm provide a flat frequency response to above 30KHz with outstanding off-axis dispersion.

The face plates are die cast in aluminum for a beautiful look with maximum mechanical stability.

D3004/6020-10 is optimized to offer small package sizes that can fit into tight spaces such as compact cabinets and automotive trim pieces where you have extra depth.

The back chamber is die cast in aluminum and designed with a contoured shape that functions as a heat sink in high power applications.


----------



## goodstuff (Jan 9, 2008)

a$$hole said:


> Scan-Speak Illuminator D3004/6020-10 Tweeter
> 
> 
> * 1" Soft Dome
> ...


What was the point of your post? We've all been to Madisound.


----------



## kyheng (Jan 31, 2007)

Copy and paste?


----------



## sqnut (Dec 24, 2009)

*Re: 2-way vs 3-way*



snaimpally said:


> I much prefer the simplicity of a good 2-way. There is less to go wrong - fewer crossovers, fewer amps, fewer cables. The best way to do a 2-way is to get a tweeter with a low Fs that can be crossed low (2-3khz). Dyn, Morel, and Scan tweeters, as well as many others fit this criteria.


Agree with the 2 way over 3 way, not so much with the x over point. I have problems dialing in 'live' sound when the vocal range is split over two sets of drivers. 

I'd much rather have a mid that can play 5khz with authority and a tweet that is cut off at 5khz on a 12db slope, and adds a lot of air and openness above 12khz


----------

