Ohm Walsh Micro Talls: who's actually heard 'em?

Back again...

My 4/5000 is of the latest iteration as far as I know.
As for frequency extension/ super tweeting...it's all fairy tales 
and wishful thinking. The tweeter JS is using as the top of the line
tweeter is a plastic peerless tweeter (4ohm) that can be bought all day long for $13-$15 nothing special. The Walsh driver will tweet up to about 2.25khz then fall of as per the chart I attached.
This is not a bad thing as long as you X-over the tweeter low enough
to make up for the difference. My idea to use a ribbon tweeter that can be crossed over below 2k with not to steep of a filter, maybe
12db or so should work very well. I also have some ideas how to
mechanicall adjust time domain. I'll attach an image of the raw tweeter driver in a bit....

Heja Sverige.....🇸🇪

Well, it’s a plus to get at that response even out of a seemingly fairly conventional 12" driver mounted like that I suppose. It covers fundamentals of most musical instruments including voice but harmonics to a more limited extent.

X000 series advertised evolution not revolution in the sound so I can’t imagine versions prior would be that much different in approach though the originals were not nearly as good sounding as those that followed.

7khz out of any driver like that seemed a stretch but who knows. That figure got in my mind somewhere along the line but do not recall the exact source.

Its possible smaller drivers in smaller models go a bit higher I suppose. If so, I’ve not noticed much difference in teh end result to date when comparing 100S3 (8" driver) to 5S3 (12").

I think it would be accurate to say conventional 2 way designs with smaller drivers are more common. I can’t think of any quality 2 ways that use a 12" driver other than these. Most are 3-way or more.

I’ve always been a fan of as few drivers as needed to get the whole job done. The sound is almost always more coherent sounding to me that way.

In the case of teh CLS drivers, I suspect the ability to mount the tweeter physically where it is relative to to driver is a big contributor to the time coherency which might account for that aspect of the Walsh CLS speaker sound compared to many others perhaps more so even than the driver crossover frequency.

Here's some new images...

The tweeter is the 4/5000 unit that was removed, the quality of the parts are abysmal, plastic housing, hot melt glue...yikes
Same tweeter was in the center channel, with that said you have to
congratulate JS for making such low cost parts sound the way they do.
I also attached an image of the CC after I was done with it believe me it looked nothing like in the image. And it sounds great, no comparison.

http://s1248.photobucket.com/user/peterhorvath6233/media/CC%201000_zpshlk96p6o.jpg.html?o=1

http://s1248.photobucket.com/user/peterhorvath6233/media/tweet%20back_zpsa2wc3rk1.jpg.html?o=1

http://s1248.photobucket.com/user/peterhorvath6233/media/tweet%201_zpsyzspyxd5.jpg.html?o=1

If you took a look at the Walsh 12" driver you notice that a lot of the driver is covered by the basket casting, they tried to mitigate the issue by adding foam padding and some sticky 3M tape on each leg of the casting. I think if they could find a casting with thinner legs I'm 
sure it could sound even better. Just look at the original F driver or 
the German Physics driver..... Just a thought.

Always ask questions......🇸🇪

Peter don’t know. I have dynaudio speakers with top notch build including highly regarded isotar  soft dome tweeter.

They are sitting unused at present. Guess which speakers in the same setup I find completely satisfying to listen to?

just goes to show there is more to making good sound than expensive highest quality parts.