Talk:Tweeter

edits

Since i am sure some clueless individual will try and revert my edits here are explinations:

The first line in the axed paragraph about ribbons didn't make sense, because waveguides have been around for longer than ribbons have to control the polar pattern. The rest was misinformed marketing dribble. See: http://www.zaphaudio.com/nondomes/

For some real tests and information on non-dome performance.

"lack of coloration/ringing" is a result of the properties driver designers look for.

Deleted a bit about size since it repeated itself.

Moved the ring radiator bit to dome since i have never seen a cone one.

Horn to bottom since it refers to "those above". "

Removed the "fixing dented tweeters" because wikipedia is not a how to guide. Noodle snacks 01:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

updated the page to add info and be consistent with "woofer". I deleted some text which had more to do with speaker building than tweeters. Someone needs to add an entry under "electrostatic speaker" and "Berylium". I know there is never agreement on audio, but we have to keep this simple and within the casual viewers needs. Cheers! Pjay99 17:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The section titled "Hertz and how it relates to tweeters" is horrible. There is no information in it specific to tweeters themselves and is little more than a discussion of a unit of frequency. It makes no sense to keep it. Palindromica 19:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Anybody disagree that the "Ring Radiator Tweeter" section should just disappear? I could do a heavy edit to remove the ad copy, but it really doesn't deserve its own section anyway. Rivertorch 05:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Delete it in a fire. Heck, I'll do it now. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 01:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Just looked at the edit history, that ring radiator section was crap, however i think its possible they they do earn a mention, however polk audio didn't invent the concept, i believe the tweeters were made and designed by http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=112 vifa] (now peerless v-line), As another example, many sonus faber speakers use ring radiators based upon scan speak ring radiators. [1] is somewhat out of date, but does list several more speakers using those tweeters. I'll leave it up to someone else to decide. Noodle snacks 04:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Compression Drivers

Most PA type speakers for the professional audio market utilise compression drivers, mated to high frequency waveguides for dispersion control. This article needs a section added for them, i have yet to find a good description for them however. Noodle snacks 04:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

See the horn tweeter section? Rivertorch 11:31, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Tweeter Edit Reversion by nishkid64

As left on nishkid64's user talk page, regarding a reverted edit.

I made two edits to the tweeter page, which you quickly removed, citing vandalism, indicating a clear lack of knowledge and/or experiance on your part, or a simple misunderstanding as to the two methods detailed, which i will explain below:

1. Method 6: Remove the dome/voicecoil assembly from the magnet assembly, where this is possible, then push dome out from rear

Many hifi tweeter allow the dome and voicecoil assembly to be removed from the magnet, allowing clear access to the dome from the rear. Whilst this ability is designed to allow replacement of a damaged voice coil, it can also be used in order to push the dome out from the rear. I have used this method on tweeters from seas, peerless, peerless v-line (formerly vifa) and scan speak, and i believe that it is possible with many other hi-fi tweeters as well. Using the example of a seas 27tdfc:

http://www.seas.no/Product%20bilder/27TDC.jpg

The four torx screws in the center can be removed, allowing access. This is clearly a valid and useful method for repairing dome indentations.

1. Method 7: "Kiss" the tweeter, sealing around the dome with the lips, then sucking.

I suspect this is why you reverted the edit, however the method works extremely well for a large number of soft dome tweeters. It works on the same principle as the vacumme cleaner method, however the suction is controlled by your lungs, the lips seal around hte edge of the dome, and suck, and out they pop.

I will revert your revertion, if you have any further gripes please talk to me about them on my talk page, or on the talk page for tweeters, I will also post this comment on the user talk page.

Noodle snacks 02:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Shouldn't that entire section just be removed? Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. So why is it necessary to have such a section in this article? Metros232 02:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I do agree here, however if the section is not to be deleted there is no harm in making improvements either, if it is going to be removed a link to a good guide or forum thread on fixing pushed in domes would be a good move, it is likely that someone might come to this page searching on how to fix a pushed in tweeter (quite a common problem) Noodle snacks 04:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Photo of Ribbon Tweeter

I believe that the Philips in the photo is not an accurate representation of the ribbon type driver. I have seen this speaker before, and have reason to believe that it is not really a ribbon driver. I suggest using a photo of an audiophile-grade speaker for this snippet.

Repair

Wiki isnt a how to, but AFAIk that doesnt preclude including relevant material that people _could_ use in a how to way if they chose. Repair of tweeters (and other speakers) is all part of a days work for many people, so its relevant, and I dont see a need to exclude it. OTOH it needs to be presented in an encyclopaedic fashion rather than as a 'how to do this in 8 steps' kind of thing.

So I'll start something encyclopaedic and wait to see what ya think. Tabby (talk) 05:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Bullet tweeter

This article is missing information on the bullet tweeter. Unfortunately although I know of them (my system uses horn loaded bullet tweeters), I do not know anything useful about them, so I haven't added them to the article. But, perhaps someone who does can add a mention? Thanks --JeffryJohnston (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit: Just took one of my tweeters apart. It appears to be a flat piezo disk approx 1" in diameter with a 1 1/2" diameter paper cone glued to the middle of it (the cone is passive, it does not have any wires, etc, attached, just the piezo). The piezo and cone assembly seems to be allowed quite a bit of movement, it almost seems as if the piezo is attached by a small spring on the back (or is just held in place by stiff wires?). But, I cannot see behind the piezo to verify so those (spring?/wires?) are just guesses. --JeffryJohnston (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting, although we can't use your findings for the article. We probably don't need to mention bullet tweeters in the article at all if they're only a minor variation on the piezo theme. Rivertorch (talk) 04:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Bullet tweeters merit an entry IMO. Jeffrey is correct in identifying bullet tweeters as a type of horn loading. Bullet tweeters are normally a type of diaphragm/horn loudspeaker arrangement that can be driven using one of many drive systems listed. The most common drive systems for bullet tweeters are voice coil and piezo electric. I cannot comment in-depth on their dispersion characteristics, as horns vary from radially exponential to more conical varieties, which give a range of performances. However their horns are always extremely short in length, exhibit a circular cross section at any point along their length, and feature a characteristic "bullet" phase plug in the horn flare itself, which is clearly intended to improve directivity and prevent beaming (which would probably be very harsh in such a short throw horn). This makes them suited for near-field audio, and they are able to be used in super tweeter, tweeter and tweeter-mid bands of small to mid hifi systems. Quality bullet tweeters can have stable and pleasant sound reproduction characteristics across a broad frequency range, although cheaper piezo bullet tweeters are common and they often have harsh spots across their frequency range, which gives bullet tweeters a bad reputation. Their horn arrangement enables most bullet tweeters to achieve a good level of efficiency, with 94-98db at 1 watt being a typical output.

Thats all the important stuff I can think of. Sorry it is 'original research' - I was an electronics engineer for many years and I learned this stuff the hard way! HMSDigDug 101.163.72.65 (talk) 03:18, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Super Tweeter

I'm not well versed in audio technology, but it seems to me that the new article Super Tweeter could probably be merged into this one. Currently, Supertweeter redirects to this page. (EhJJ)^TALK 05:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

There are multiple problems with the article Super Tweeter. First of all, there's no such thing; the term is supertweeter (one word). Second, the statement that supertweeters "are usually used to emphasize the sound from the regular tweeters" isn't necessarily true; there are many supertweeters which, rather than after-market add-ons, are built in to speakers in the first place, often in conjunction with midtweeters, and don't emphasize anything. Third, the wording—"usually found in Hi-Fi speaker systems and home theatre systems"—is ambiguous: presumably, it means that that's where existing supertweeters are generally found (well, duh!), but it can also be read as meaning that most hi-fi and home theater speakers contain supertweeters, which is false. Then there's the external link, which leads merely to a review of a single supertweeter. Since the article in question is a stub containing no useful info to add to this article, it should be deleted, not merged. Adding a short paragraph on supertweeters would be in order for this article, though. Rivertorch (talk) 05:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Support merge (as in, redirect to section) & addition of some section about supertweeters to this article. (I arrived here from doing new page patrol. You can help!) //roux   21:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I, too, would like to see a merge and redirect. Historically, supertweeters were used in some sound reinforcement applications at a time when concert sound companies were rolling their own boxes--there was the Electrovoice DH3 that went up to 20 kHz if you EQ'd the crap out of it and there was the EV T350 that did 15k easily back in the '70s when that kind of performance earned the 'super' name. These days, the supertweeter name lives on in some product types such as EAW's DCT1 and DCT2 which are high powered multiple tweeter arrays for dance clubs though their "super-ness" isn't so much about high frequency extension than high power output at around 15 kHz. Basically, "supertweeter" is a concept that changes relative to the situation, making it very hard to pin down. Binksternet (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I know that the supertweeter reference was not very good, but I looked everywhere and that was the only thing I could find.

Inconsistent

Plasmatronics says the plasma tweeter didn't generate ozone, this page says that it did. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.124.61.215 (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for clarification, section on "Ferrofluid"

Either I'm missing something, or the section on Ferrofluid does not clearly explain what purposes the ferrofluid serves. A few sentences into the parargraph the section does mention that Ferrofluid also aids in centering the voice coil, which reads strangely because this is the first mention of something that ferrofluids do.

My guess is that “ferrofluid” can serve as a coolant, given that my speakers are supposed to be “ferrofluid cooled”.

Could someone who's more knowledgeable than I am please clarify this section? Thanks.

W.F.Galway (talk) 18:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know very much about ferrofluid but I did talk to engineer Bob Cavin, some fifteen years ago, who described how ferrofluid was first used at McCune Sound in San Francisco as a coolant inside their HF compression drivers, and that it was then used for the same purpose in the two spinoff companies founded by former McCune engineers, Meyer Sound Laboratories and Apogee Sound, after which it was used everywhere. I have never heard that it helps center the voice coil and so I can't confirm or deny this. Binksternet (talk) 19:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is that the primary purpose of ferrofluid is to cool the voice coil, which promotes greater power handling and less risk of damage at sustained high input levels. We should look for a source for this; the section is currently a mess. Rivertorch (talk) 19:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Linnaeum

The article Linnaeum has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references {Linnaeum tweeter) found only a couple published (gBooks) minor mentions fails WP:N and WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:38, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Moderntweeter.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Moderntweeter.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)