2. speakers
  3. 193024-171531

soft dome versus hard dome tweeters

As my internet window shopping continues, I was reading on some speakers that listed for the tweeter textile dome and also silk dome.

So then I used the 'search discussion' function on this site on the subject of soft versus hard dome tweeters and it seemed as if most of the members who offered opinions used that "harsh" and "fatiguing" and "ringing" to describe how they felt about hard dome speakers. In the admittedly short time that I spent reading, I was not picking up a lot of love for hard dome tweeters.

But there are reputable speaker manufacturers that seem to have gone the extra mile to make their hard dome tweeters as hard as possible using, for example, beryllium or artificial(?) diamond dust.

I wouldn't expect a consensus on much of anything audio, but did I just by luck to find responses by mostly people who prefer soft dome tweeters?  Because if they really sound that bad (harsh/fatiguing/ringing) in comparison, why would reputable manufacturers choose this route?  And I do realize that appreciation of a sonic effect is subjective, so did I just happen on responses by members who had mostly the same subjective perception?

immatthewj
oddiofyl's avatar
oddiofyl
4,042 posts
 

My last few speakers , Heresy III , Forte IV , Revel M106 , PSB M2, and a few others had metal domes. They all sounded pretty good.

I had a pair of Sonus Faber Concerto that had a silk dome, Igave them to my brother. I replaced them with a single driver "full range" speaker and I missed the sparkle of a conventional 2 or 3 way..

I recently bought a pair of Studio Electric M4, an acoustic suspension compact monitor. They use a 6.5" High excursion mid/woofer and a 1" silk dome tweeter. They sound phenomenal. In terms of sound quality I think they may the best sounding speaker I have ever owned. I can listen for long periods without fatigue, i credit the tweeter for that. . Awesome speaker.

helomech
1,754 posts
 

Those who denigrate hard domes and lump them all into the same category haven’t heard any quality ones. A good quality beryllium, diamond or carbon tweeter will outperform nearly any soft dome and sound less fatiguing in the process. Even the $300+ soft domes from Seas and Scanspeak do not sound as extended and realistic as a good beryllium to my ears. And most manufacturers are not employing soft domes near the caliber of a $350 Seas Excel. 

Even the $60 anodized aluminum tweeter from SB Acoustics outperforms a lot of pricier soft domes. 

russbutton's avatar
russbutton
446 posts
 

I run a set of Linkwitz Orions I put together in 2006.  They use the SEAS millennium tweeter.  In fact, being an open baffle design, they use 4 of them.  Two facing the front and two facing the rear.  I believe theyʻre crossover at 1000 hz.  Very expense, but thatʻs because they have exceptional power handling.

They have a mid-range that I find to be unsurpassed on acoustic piano, voices and acoustic instruments.  Just incredible. 

That same tweeter is used in any number of hi-end commercial systems, not the least of which are the $14,000+ designs from Joseph Audio.

I canʻt speak to the hard dome tweeters youʻre mentioning, but the SEAS millennium tweeter is just amazing.  Not cheap though...

axeis1
299 posts
 

I really like ribbon tweeters. The ribbon tweeter in the ProAc speakers are exceptional. That said the the Dynaudio Esotar 3 is the best tweeter I’ve ever heard.

firberger's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
firberger
115 posts
 

Personally I prefer soft domes. Have had both .

And,  I also enjoy Ribbon Tweeters

I found hard domes could be fatiguing after an hour and or played loudly .They did seem to have slightly more clarity and precision. Just not my cup of tea over the long haul.

YMMV as expected

More to discover