Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: how many real world watts can a 20w ribbon tweeter take? posted by thump on February 20, 2017 at 20:59:01
as i was saying in my previous comment, i bet a nickel against the member who CLAIMED horns are lower distortion than ribbons (really?! they why don't 99.9% of speaker manufacturers use horns?) that horns would have resonance issues related to the reflections inherent in horns, and a little bit of research bore that out as seen in the illustration above. i used the B&C waterfall plot because it was the first one i could find. i'm sure if i dug some more, i'd get similar or even worse results from larger horns.
just LOOK as those two waterfall plots! it's not even close! virtually ALL of the raal's resonances are over before even .2 millisecons (it looks closer to .1ms) while the B&C horn's full frequency resonances are still going strong at .7ms with a resonance around 700Hz extending out to about a FULL 3ms and a hideous resonance around 17kHz that extends a full 4.7ms!
so, that right there DESTROYS unequivocally ANY claims that horns are "less distorted" where the raal is something like 8 times faster in JUST the broadband resonances and about 40 times faster when you look at the peak resonance.
i'm glad to see that the physics in my head exactly matches my predictions DESPITE being told i'm full of crap. anyone that could look at those two plots and claim the horn beats the ribbon absolutely can't read a waterfall correctly.
in case anyone would DARE claim i faked the results, here's links to the original sources...
Raal 70-10 (i couldn't find any fountek plots)
now if ONLY someone would do a freakin' waterfall plot for the same woofer in both sealed and ported boxes (why hasn't anyone done this?!!!), then i'd have equally compelling evidence that proves what hideous slop ports do to transients, not that port trolls would ever accept THAT evidence either.
"just LOOK as those two waterfall plots! it's not even close!"
2-4kHz, the horn produces 108dB.
2-4kHz, the RAAL produces 87-90dB.
To properly compare them, you'd have to give the RAAL 100x as much power as the B&C.
The B&C waterfall plot has a 30dB vertical axis.
Over 2-4kHz, the B&C covers almost the whole vertical axis
The RAAL waterfall plot covers only 26dB.
Over 2-4kHz, the RAAL covers 2/3 of this; about 16dB.
The B&C plot therefore gives about 12dB more detail.
To properly compare them, you'd have to ignore the bottom 12dB of the B&C plot.
So yes "it's not even close"
"a resonance around 700Hz"
That's below the horn's cut off frequency. That's much lower than the RAAL can play.
"and a hideous resonance around 17kHz"
You are too old to hear 17kHz.
Uncertain what you are trying to achieve, it appeared you wanted advice on high efficiency setup, but seem more interested not in the help but in confrontation.
To come to a Hi Eff forum and proclaim that what 80% of the users on the forum have is "wrong and don't they know any better" is much like going to a Chevy forum and telling everybody that Ford is the only answer.
I'd suggest that you could learn a lot from the experts on this forum as some actually "did write the book" on horn design and measurements.
The good news , that unlike many other forums, the Hi Eff has some well mannered and patient elders who can calmly explain why some of your hypotheses have flaws and how to understand what would be needed to refine your hypotheses.
Or you could continue on your present path and ultimately be ignored instead of helped.
i came here to ask what the ACTUAL power rating of the ribbon i wanted to use was, didn't get an answer, and instead got a bunch of trolls trying to impose their tastes on me.
yeah... if you can't answer my question, it's better you DO ignore me and not waste my time defending MY PREFERENCES from your UNSOLICITED trolling
keep your lousy horns to yourself. i don't recall asking about them to begin with BTW and it is YOU arguing with ME!
this is MY FREAKIN' THREAD, IT ISN'T ABOUT HORNS, DEAL WITH IT!!!
you don't want to help with the ACTUAL question i asked, you aren't freakin' helping... ARE YOU?!!!
yep... i just checked... the EXACT TITLE of this thread is
how many real world watts can a 20w ribbon tweeter take?
where the eff do you see ANYTHING that gives you the idea that i was asking for your 2 cents about HORNS TROLL? if you can't talk about HIGH EFFICIENCY RIBBONS then you have no business here.
i seem to remember starting this thread with a question about RIBBONS, NOT horns
as to arguing, there is no arguing, the waterfall plot CLEARLY shows that horn tweeters are resonant, waterfailing (hahaha) abominations. if you don't want to accept that i'm looking for a ribbon/planar/AMT solution, then it's YOU who's bringing the argument, and YES, i'd rather you take that crap somewhere else and tell it to someone who hasn't CLEARLY STATED they have no interest in horns.
you are just like all those annoying distorted ported lovers who troll every thread i make talking about my SEALED system when i never asked for their input or trying to impose their tastes on me.
if all you're here to do is promote horns, you are wasting my time.
don't worry, i'll steer clear of YOUR horn loving threads,UNLESS someone asking what sounds best. to my ears, waterfall blurring resonances whether they be from a port or a horn are an unholy abomination.
i don't recall needing your permission to hold those priorities.
now go troll someone else
The RAAL is a special device that few people would dispute that its one of the best in it's useable range.
Now take any other ten ribbons costing under $200.00 and compare them to ten horn and drivers in the same price range.
I'll skip to the results...the horns\drivers will show lower THD below 5Khz some of the ribbons will show lower THD above 5Khz. Both device types tend to have much lower odd order distortion, a very desirable characteristic.
Nothing really to argue about. Use them both for their advantages.
Could you zoom in on the ribbon measurement so one can see the dB scale on the left hand side, that would allow a comparison of the plots.
Fwiw, normally the 980 would be eq'd to flat on what ever horn it was used on, not used "raw".
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: