Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: Tweeter for Vitavox S2. High-sensitively ribbons?
Post Subject: TAD PT-R9 tweeter: love and hate….Posted by Romy the Cat on: 10/22/2006
I tried the driver and generally I do like it’s sound a lot. It more sophisticated then Linaeum, it is more noble tonally and alike the Linaeum is seamlessly melts with Vitavox S2. In fact I am developing recently a theorem according to which a compression tweeters is… might be very much a fundamentally faulty way for HF reproduction. Do not make a conclusion that I’m idiot too fast – I have a lot of reasons to think this way, not only because my practical conclusions but rather the conceptual reasons (it will be another thread)
The TAD PT-R9, despite it's superb sound, has 3 problems:
1) It has a lot of ambiance noise, that makes it “always there” instated to be there only when it called upon. The Linaeum practically free form this problem, however they are treated by Bud Purvine with his EnABL Patterns:
EnABL Patterns (pdf)
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue21/standingwaves.htm.
I did not experimented with virgin Linaeum tweeters but Bud claims that the original Linaeum are way different (as far as noise concern) then his treated Linaeum. So, presumably if the EnABL Patterns were applied to TAD PT-R9 driver then it might loose its “ambient noise” as well? Or perhaps that large stupid buffle should be removed at all? It was a reference to my post above:
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?postID=2989#2989
2) TAD PT-R9 has some very very very vey minor “common denominator sweetness” that is identically across all recordings. It is auditable what I drive tem with Milq and it is not auditable when I drive them with 100W amp… Sounds familiar?
3) The TAD PT-R9 driver specification said that it has 97.5dB at 1W/1M sensitivity. Well, when I say that those marketing idiots should be shot in their stupid heads then do you think I was kidding? OK, tell me: what made those cretins to advertise that the drivers have 97.5dB? Below are 2K and up sweeps driven by Super Milq HF channel’s at the same volumes. The first one is 109dB sensitive Vitavox S2 driver. The Second is reportedly 97.5dB sensitive TAD PT-R9 that looks more like 91dB sensitive… Sucks!!! The last sweep is the TAD PT-R9 driven by a single full-range Melquiades at full 15W power.
I think no further comments are necessary….
Rgs,
Romy the CatRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site