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.
rgs92
Hi Develboy,
Read and prepare to be enlightened

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue55/coincident.htm

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue55/coincident.htm

If they are properly implimented they are not at all sterile. Also note the amps being used to drive them with best results.

Regards,
Although all whats being said is true in my opinion , they will not sound as fat as a paper/composite mid will .
Good implemented off course , there are more roads to rome than one .
they give more weight to the presentation , more fat , which one is the correct one i dont know
I think the comments about speakers with Accuton drivers sounding thin are due to a preference of speakers that have bloom. My Salks, with Accuton midranges, sound very transparent and have little bloom. I use them in their open baffle mode and use a tube preamp to give them bloom. That is a magical combination. I am very grateful to the quality of their sound. I just want to kneel in front of my speakers and kiss the carpet in worship.

Bob