beryllium vs diamond

smodtactical141 posts07-15-2019 12:58am@ctsooner those carbon tweeters on the Vandys look extremely appealing. You make it sound like they have the detail of a magico but the ease of a Wilson ?


To my ears, as well as many I know, the Vandersteen’s put you a third of the way back in Orchestra in the middle seat. They are also near or full range (depending on your model).

Not trying to turn this into a commercial though.

I searched to find out if some tweeters are 100% Be with no substrate, but the best I found was ’Be Foil’. Either way, you are trying to get pure piston movement of all speakers (dynamic).

I recently tested a LOT of tweeters to decide what I wanted to include in my speakers.  

Beryllium is bright and metallic.  Some brands do a better job of taming it than others but at a root level, I just couldn't love any of the ones I have heard.  Tons of detail but at a very fatiguing price.  I would rather listen to a silk dome personally unless paired with very warm electronics.  

Diamond tweeters to me sound better but the only one I have heard that I really love is from Accuton and it is PRICEY!  Marten's high end speakers are mind boggling in terms of soundstage but at $1500 each for just the tweeter, I found it difficult to include in my speakers.  Lesser diamond tweeters lack the soundstage that beryllium delivers.  

Accuton and Eton both offer ceramic domes though Eton is sandwiched with Magnesium.  Much more reasonably priced and I feel they offer as much detail as a beryllium without the hard, metallic edge.  Incidentally, I opted to use Eton tweeters in my speakers.  

Today's dome tweeters are way superior to what we had 20 years ago primarily because their power handling has improved to the degree that you can get to 100+ dB without blowing them. For a point source system a single tweeter is optimal. Arrays with dome tweeters just do not work well primarily because you can not get good ones close enough to form a smooth linear array. To do this at 20 KHz the edge of the domes has to be closer than 15 mm. Not easy which is why ribbons make far better linear arrays. Will they ever be as good as an electrostatic speaker? If you prefer point source speakers sure. If not then never. ESLs are better than ribbons because their acoustic impedance more closely matches that of air and you can ditch the crossovers. The downside is that you wind up with a very large loudspeaker. 

Will they ever be as good as an electrostatic speaker?

And ESL's will never be as good as Plasma tweeters. I have a pair of Plasma MP-02's crossed over from my ESL panels.
You've never heard/seen highs "dance" in front of like fireflies you till you've experienced Plasma tweeters.
It's all about the "diaphragm mass" when it comes to producing the upper mids/highs, and a Plasma flame has no mass.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Magnat-Plasma-MP-02-ion-tweeter-massless-air-plasma-speaker-Plasmahochtoner/272894087984?hash=item3f89c15330:g:V5sAAOSwCJxZ6PXy

Cheers George

They are interesting to say the least. I was in on the ground floor with Hill Plasmatronics helium tanks and all. I am not sure what those are but they are not plasma speakers. To create a plasma you need some serious heat which requires serious power and an inert gas. Those things would melt. Aside from that they are not line sources so they will not radiate in a way to match a line source. Maybe they will work well with a point source but you would have to get them close to the midrange driver which would make them impractical to use with most point source speakers.