I ran my ceramic drivers on a Bent Audio autoformer passive preamp and my friend runs his ceramic drivers with a music first transformer passive preamp and neither system sounds natural or "organic". I highly recommend a PHY driver if you want those characteristics. My advice: don't be "suckered in" to the ceramics. They fool you early, but prove themselves hard to listen to in the long run.
Is the Accuton driver that good?
It seems a lot of new speakers are using the Accuton or similar ceramic drivers (and I notice the diamond variant for tweeters). I've heard them (mainly in Kharmas), but not others. Evolution, Salk, Avalon, and like I said Kharma use them.
Do they have any particular coloration or quality that is making them gain popularity? In the Kharmas, it was pace and timing and a natural sound without overhang, but it was different than regular (non-metallic) cones & domes, which, fwiw, are less detailed but maybe more relaxing.
It's like for me with the Kharmas "this sounds great and real and not bright or hard either" but somehow it is not as relaxing as the Aerials or Von Schweikerts or Quad dynamics(or even Apogees) I have lived with). I can't put my finger on it.
I'm not sure if it was just the Kharmas or the ceramics in general, but I wanted to raise the question.
Do they have any particular coloration or quality that is making them gain popularity? In the Kharmas, it was pace and timing and a natural sound without overhang, but it was different than regular (non-metallic) cones & domes, which, fwiw, are less detailed but maybe more relaxing.
It's like for me with the Kharmas "this sounds great and real and not bright or hard either" but somehow it is not as relaxing as the Aerials or Von Schweikerts or Quad dynamics(or even Apogees) I have lived with). I can't put my finger on it.
I'm not sure if it was just the Kharmas or the ceramics in general, but I wanted to raise the question.
- ...
- 53 posts total
- 53 posts total