Tang Band 2145 in action

I am very much a fan of wide-band drivers, particularly in systems employing them in multi-way systems where the wideband driver covers a very substantial part of the frequency range.

But, even among fans of this type of speaker, there is no consensus on what is better, much less best, and personal taste can dictate widely varying approaches to utilizing such drivers.  At a local dealership that builds custom speakers, I heard a system utilizing a GIP 4165 driver (12" field coil full range driver).  The experiment was between using that driver full range without any other driver, or using a tweeter at a very high nominal crossover point (first order high-pass filter to the tweeter, the 4165 driven full range).  I preferred the two-way configuration, but, not because it delivered more highs or better dispersion, but, because I thought the upper midrange sounded smoother and less peaky.  Most of the other listeners agreed with me, but, not everyone preferred the two-way version; the designer/builder preferred the single driver version.

Would that be because someone pointed these things out to you?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No 
due to the DavidLouis has construuct that is cool and neat looking.
Almost a  clone of a   german labs speaker.
Mids were a  tad better in the DLVX8 vs the Tang Band.  Bass near identical. 
Why so, since both cones are completely dif materails,,I have no idea.

Blind test, you'd be lucky to guess which is which, at least on some/most records.

Glad you like your conventional LOUD speakers.
And that you found the WB's lacking. 
Whereas I found them near perfect, if not perfect  for my classical music. 

Here is a  bass test,  4 pieces for Timipini,  Elliott Carter.
I give it  10/10

WB;'s are only 1 speaker option in the wide world of speaker designs.

Here you get a  hint at the bass response.
YMMV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QtuLPchkt0

driven full range). I preferred the two-way configuration, but, not because it delivered more highs or better dispersion, but, because I thought the upper midrange sounded smoother and less peaky

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm runninga  paper 3.5 inch tweet and love it..
But am considering adding a  Be with a  Nd magnet.
I like over lap in my fq range. 
The cap is a 2.2 and guess runs from 9khz on up.
So there is a  over lap of Davidlouis 9k on up with the Kasun.
Sounds fantastic.
Same with the W18's, has a  10uf cap and guessing runs up to 1600hz. 
So over laps Davidlouis 
DLVX8 taps into 40ishhz 
W18 40ish hz.
So over lap 
40hz-1600hz
Sounds super.
Ck out the new YT vid above on bass response.
Ain't too shabby for a  WBer. Which has a  stigma of lacking  good bass.

WOW 
I was listening to the bass YT  vid  only via the top FR section of my $20 computer speakers,,,I decided to  flip over the down firing sub portion,  which houses a  3 inch woofer. 
Now we are talking
Please do the same to REALLY hear these guys in action on Timipini bass.

You do realize most of us have had, or have heard full range drivers, right?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Then why so seldom mention around here??

btw I do not like the looks of that Wide  band construction.

Also note, why high SPL???
I never got high spl as something necessary for music.
I listen low/mid vol, maybe 65 spl. Very near field listening, 8 feet.
Most of  the xover low sens groupies have not heard AER and Voxativ.
If you did, there would be more talk about both.
The most popular WBer is the Tang band, as readily avaliable at Parts Express.
TB 1808
TB1772
and what I think is their best the 2145
I don't think, Mark Audio holds up against the Tang band and DavidLouis
 So  far I'm the only one here who actually heard the TB2145 and even moreso, None of you've heard, nor are aware it even EXISTS
The davidLouis VX8.
My posts are EDU 101 in WBers  performance results vs your convention xover types.

I think its clear the shootout went very well for the WBers. 
Lousey for the xover type.
Thors at $2K + my upgardes $1200+, vs a  $550 WBer.