+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 91 to 95 of 95

Thread: Geez, who the hell needs TAD

  1. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by 4313B View Post
    It's a neo 2446 which means it lost a whole lot of weight (20 lbs.) If you have it, use it?
    Oh, I'm using them. I was just wondering why relatively few others seem to be. If not the snout, them maybe the cost might be it. I don't know, and I'm not going to lose any sleep over it, but they are what I have.

  2. #92
    Unabashed Speakerholic cosmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    293

    The almost finished product:

    Here they are, as they appeared at AKFest 2010. They sounded great and I think they looked pretty nice too. They aren't quite done yet.. feet yet to come.
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  3. #93
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Strasbourg (France)
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmos View Post
    Interesting you make this comment. Brush Wellman is touting as a selling point that their diaphragms are more durable than Titanium or Vapor Deposition Beryllium because of their process.. Sounds like you can get the best of both worlds? I won't ever put my drivers to test in HiFi use, but for SR..


    That makes complete sense to me. I tried (on 350Hz Edgar horns) swapping Radian 1245-8 diaphragms with 2441 and 2445 motors and could not perceive a difference. The 2445 with the Aluminum Radian diaphragms sounded smoother than with their stock Ti diaphragms, but they lost HF extension. It was the results of that test that led me to buying Truextent diaphragms. I figured that the body was improvable by simply changing diaphragms and Beryllium should give good HF extension and smooth, musical sound.

    I like it..

    In my 2445 core (5 slit metal core) I have tried NOS D16R2445 (original Ti diaph), NOS D16R2441 (aluminium), Non-JBL Be diaphs, and some aftermarket stuff (ribbed Ti). The non-JBL Be had indeed extremely smooth sound (great on classical music, opera, violin etc) and more HF extension in the area 8-12kHz but then dropped dramatically in a way which I did not manage to compensate with a passive crossover using HF boost circuitry. Aftermarket ribbed Ti diaphs gave a similar sound (no joke). 2441 Al diaphs were very smooth indeed, but lacked UHF extension and impact in the 2445 core with my horns.

    For the time being, I've decided to stay with the NOS 2445 Ti diaphs due to their UHF extension capabilities with the UHF boost circuit, general sound impact and resolution etc. , and tried to get the best and most out of them with appropriate horn and equalising. I'm still working on it: Russian NOS capacitors in the mid and the HF/UHF crossover paths give a harmonically rich and milder yet very resolved sound (I discovered that the 2445 shows the limits of classical MKP caps) , adjusting cap/coil values and boost level carefully, adding a serial 30 ohm cap etc. have helped a lot smoothing reasonably the 2445 diaph, without loosing attack and the "bite" of this diaph which is so extraordinary on pop rock, jazz and good recordings generally etc.

    2445 Ti diaphs do not forgive bad recordings, any saturation in the mikes and recording preamps etc...This is noticeable on good recordings made for instance in natural ambiance with mikes run at high power supply levels with tube preamps. The Ti diaphs can be a pain in the neck but also a fantastic magnifying glass of recording defects... In contrast, the Be and aftermarket ribbed Ti diaphs allow you to forget about the system on most recordings and classical music but still...Tweeter is needed and something is missing in terms of impact to my taste.

  4. #94
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Strasbourg (France)
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by cosmos View Post
    Here they are, as they appeared at AKFest 2010. They sounded great and I think they looked pretty nice too. They aren't quite done yet.. feet yet to come.

    These are very nice horns/waveguides and in my experience up to now, an excellent geometry for home-FI use on a 2" driver. I had, similarly, a pair of 2" entry JBL-inspired "butt-cheeks" horn custom-made by someone, which give so far the best compromise in terms of openness, presence, equalising possibilities, UHF extension etc. . At least in comparison for instance with JBL 2350 which is definitely a long throw PA horn (but I intend to test these with extra vertical lips some day as recommended by JBL), 2382a which is a great design but has too broad coverage in my home and gives a lesser sensation of immediacy to the sound etc.

  5. #95
    Senior Member ivica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    serbia
    Posts
    721

    2445 -2450 & non-Ribbed Ti Diaphragm

    Quote Originally Posted by Elac310 View Post
    In my 2445 core (5 slit metal core) I have tried NOS D16R2445 (original Ti diaph), NOS D16R2441 (aluminium), Non-JBL Be diaphs, and some aftermarket stuff (ribbed Ti). The non-JBL Be had indeed extremely smooth sound (great on classical music, opera, violin etc) and more HF extension in the area 8-12kHz but then dropped dramatically in a way which I did not manage to compensate with a passive crossover using HF boost circuitry. Aftermarket ribbed Ti diaphs gave a similar sound (no joke). 2441 Al diaphs were very smooth indeed, but lacked UHF extension and impact in the 2445 core with my horns.

    For the time being, I've decided to stay with the NOS 2445 Ti diaphs due to their UHF extension capabilities with the UHF boost circuit, general sound impact and resolution etc. , and tried to get the best and most out of them with appropriate horn and equalising. I'm still working on it: Russian NOS capacitors in the mid and the HF/UHF crossover paths give a harmonically rich and milder yet very resolved sound (I discovered that the 2445 shows the limits of classical MKP caps) , adjusting cap/coil values and boost level carefully, adding a serial 30 ohm cap etc. have helped a lot smoothing reasonably the 2445 diaph, without loosing attack and the "bite" of this diaph which is so extraordinary on pop rock, jazz and good recordings generally etc.

    2445 Ti diaphs do not forgive bad recordings, any saturation in the mikes and recording preamps etc...This is noticeable on good recordings made for instance in natural ambiance with mikes run at high power supply levels with tube preamps. The Ti diaphs can be a pain in the neck but also a fantastic magnifying glass of recording defects... In contrast, the Be and aftermarket ribbed Ti diaphs allow you to forget about the system on most recordings and classical music but still...Tweeter is needed and something is missing in terms of impact to my taste.
    Hi Elac310,

    I have got almost the same conclusion with the measurements
    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...l=1#post353522

    Regards
    ivica

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. TAD Compression Drivers - Opinions on TD-4001 vs. 4003?
    By Mondie in forum Miscellaneous Gear
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 03-23-2009, 03:45 AM
  2. JBL Be Drivers compared to TAD
    By soundboy in forum Lansing Product DIY Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-01-2006, 10:07 PM
  3. "A" in Chemistry
    By speakerdave in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-06-2005, 09:07 PM
  4. TAD 4002 compression drivers
    By scott fitlin in forum Miscellaneous Gear
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-13-2003, 11:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts