Which Tweeter preferred- dome natural material, Beryllium/Metal or Planar Ribbon? Why?

I modified my AMTs to take the peak out of the high end (~10kHz) using a diffraction lens I designed/developed, and to boost the lower end by extending the flair.

I also remove the back wave because I don’t want the reflections, which can be unpredictible.

I also designed and made the stands out of 3/8" smoked acrylic cut on the laser table.  I also have a pair in clear if anyone is interested in them.

Back to tweeters….

Best I’ve heard so far are the ribbons on the Quad z-2. 

As described in Stereophile … as it goes in the wrriteup goes for the smaller lower quad speakers  

Have heard the quad S-2 that have a smaller version … “were incandescent in”there highs  I think the z-2 exceed the S-2 and should as the tweeter is twice the size.

last favorite was the titanium domes on psb speakers  

magenapan quasi ribbon was not as transparent but haven’t yet heard the new revamped Maggie’s  

look forward to my next steps up to beryllium and diamond done  

dont like the myriad of soft tweeters speakers (of differing materials) I’ve heard as they dont get brass instruments and cymbals right with the proper metallic clang  

As always it’s all in the implementation..

For me its all about fatigue. I've built a few speakers and the metals don't work for me. Recently tried the Scanspeak Illuminator and they were very nice. The 2608 was a bit lifeless. The Dynaudio D28/2 and the D260 are my favorites and I could listen to all day. I have not heard a good ribbon and would like to try that soon. Would pair it with some oider Dynaudio 17W75s or a Scanspeak 4531. You all already gave me some ideas - thanks.

Kapton for ribbon midranges and tweeters for higher power handling, but not quite as smooth as mylar. Aluminum for cylindrical tweeters and midranges seem less harsh sounding than titanium. I've not tried beryllium so no opinion but some swear by beryllium.