[Danny_B 89]

I'm afraid I can't say a lot right now. Just keep an eye out in the coming months for the launch of our new website which will have all the information on improvements and possibly any new products .

Sorry I can't say anymore

 

[piotrus-g]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan@ACS /img/forum/go_quote.gif As for the crossover i think their is alot of false advertising with crossovers and indeed drivers the "on board" crossover on the TWFK is just a link wire across the two negative terminals what you do with the positive terminals makes the difference as one side of the driver is mids other highs.

So you say that TWFK doesn't have crossover. If i want to wire the driver properly I have to use at least capacitor as a crossover between positive connectors of TWFK?

Have you ever tried to leave place behind TWFK? It should work as a bass-reflex so bass should be deeper and more textured

 

[FYJX]

Why use the TWFK as a bass driver when you can place a better driver in place for the low frequencies?

 

[Danny_B 89]

Quote:

So you say that TWFK doesn't have crossover. If i want to wire the driver properly I have to use at least capacitor as a crossover between positive connectors of TWFK?

You can put a capacitor across the two positive ports but i wouldnt advise it you can either link them with wire so they are crossed. Or just wire to the mid or high positive port for the desired sound. Hope that makes sense

Moadi is right you wouldn't use it as bass driver in any application

 

[FYJX]

I would only use one element of the TWFK as a Low Frequency driver if the size of the monitor were limited to only fitting a TWFK. Otherwise, i would use another driver for the low frequencies.

 

[piotrus-g]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan@ACS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Moadi is right you wouldn't use it as bass driver in any application

Thanks for clearing out

You don't recommend using TWFK for bass but I'm not saying I'm going to do that

 

[FYJX]

NO actually...i forbid the use of the TWFK as a low freq. driver...=)

 

[Bilavideo]

I agree with the idea that one would not use the TWFK as a dedicated woofer. It's not a dedicated woofer. On the other hand, it's not a dedicated tweeter, either. It's marketed as a "dual" driver, allowing manufacturers to buy two drivers and sell "three." The TWFK is not a dedicated anything. But before anybody hurls their rocks, let's talk about what it really is: The TWFK is (a) a wide-range driver that has extremely sweet HF; (b) the world's smallest "dual" driver; and (c) an extremely high-quality driver, with impressively flat performance throughout much of the frequency range. Where it goes loopy is in the HF, which is where they all go loopy. Sources like Headroom even argue that drivers are designed to roll off at the high end because, in the narrow, low-dispersion environment of the ear canal, a little HF goes a long, long way.

If you're looking for enhanced, booming, accentuated bass, you would obviously not choose the TWFK, but so what? Because of its flat performance, you could add the TWFK to a high-output driver like the SR or the CI-22955 (filtered to suppress all the midrange and HF that overshadow their actual LF output) and get amazing bass. Use the red filter for solid, knock-me-on-my-butt bass, but do better than the UM3X. Filter the CI or SR ONLY. Don't put the filter into the same tube as the TWFK (doing so is why the UM3X uses only a white filter and has HF attenuation issues that bother some listeners). I love my UM3X but (1) it doesn't need a crossover (total nonsense) and (2) My redesigned UM3X sounds loads better because it doesn't filter the TWFK; it filters the CI-22955 which a much stronger filter than the white filter used by the UM3X.

 

[FYJX]

Yes, no one would use the TWFK as a low driver unless its the only driver in the monitor, second basically all drivers a full-range, it's just some excel at performing in a certain frequency range. HF is where the TWFK lives.

I actualy would keep the crossover on the UM3X less load on a driver means less distortion, and the better it performs at what it's suppose to. Keeping the crossover is a good thing,w hat they need though is a dual bore design with separate filters.

 

[piotrus-g]

I'm not looking for boomy or overwhelming bass, actually I prefer natural presentation with a texutre and body but not very forward sounding to the other freq.
All I'm trying to say that TWFK might have good sounding bass but it would require a lot of work and numbers of tries and could give no effects. You are only looking at the graphs but remeber that the graph has been done in some other environment. I would try to bass-reflex TWKF to see what happen just for the science

Of course looking at the graphs TWFK is not bass oriented driver. I believe that CI is much much better. But I doubt about SR - if you listened to pl-50 you'd know that it has better midrange then bass and bass is IMO worse then Audeo's

According to your posts I'd try to build let say 3-way customs with tripple bore. In each bore place an acoustic resistor and wire the drivers with capacitors instead of crossover. It sould give a compromise between yours designs. So LF would be attenuated eighter by capacitor and let say red filter. The same for mids and highs using other acoustic filters of course.
I think about that config: CI - lows, WBHC - mids - TWFK highs.

[Edit]I came across mouser offer and found out that dampers costs about 80 Euro each. 80*6 = 480 euro for dampers only. I think my "compromise design" is not really perfect

 

[Bilavideo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by piotrus-g /img/forum/go_quote.gif All I'm trying to say that TWFK might have good sounding bass but it would require a lot of work and numbers of tries and could give no effects. You are only looking at the graphs but remeber that the graph has been done in some other environment.

I respectfully disagree. I'm not just looking at graphs. I'm speaking from experience. If you wire up a TWFK by itself, and put it in an earplug that offers adequate sound isolation, you'll get very clean and dynamic bass out of it. You won't get headbanger bass, but that kind of bass comes from drivers and designs that accentuate the bass for effect. As for the graphs, KA's graphs are based on the use of a minimal, white, 680 ohm, filter.

Quote:

I would try to bass-reflex TWKF to see what happen just for the science. Of course looking at the graphs TWFK is not bass oriented driver. I believe that CI is much much better. But I doubt about SR - if you listened to pl-50 you'd know that it has better midrange then bass and bass is IMO worse then Audeo's

Neither the CI nor the SR are really woofers. They're simply useful to convert as such because they're high-output drivers. They actually produce more midrange than bass. The midrange and HF are suppressed by way of mechanical filters. The UM3X gets decent bass by simply using a white filter (680 ohms). I prefer the browns and reds, but the more HF you screen out, the more compensation you have to make for it, so when I had the single filter screening both the CI and the TWFK, I would have to adjust the EQ on my iPod to the Treble Boost setting. A better way to do it, without having to make any EQ adjustment at all, is to simply bifurcate by using separate filters, a white one (at most) for the TWFK and a dark one (red, brown or green) for the CI.

Quote:

According to your posts I'd try to build let say 3-way customs with tripple bore. In each bore place an acoustic resistor and wire the drivers with capacitors instead of crossover. It sould give a compromise between yours designs. So LF would be attenuated eighter by capacitor and let say red filter. The same for mids and highs using other acoustic filters of course. I think about that config: CI - lows, WBHC - mids - TWFK highs. [Edit]I came across mouser offer and found out that dampers costs about 80 Euro each. 80*6 = 480 euro for dampers only. I think my "compromise design" is not really perfect

Triples are not necessary. They're just a marketing scheme. Most loudspeaker designs today use a two-way crossover. What you're trying to do is present the best signature for your LF and the best signature for your HF. The midrange is so ample that it takes care of itself. I, personally, like my three-way design on my loudspeaker system, so I understand the attraction, but when you get to earphones, even a single-driver design can be quite good, provided it drives high enough and low enough to work.

 

[Bilavideo]

ONE MORE LITTLE POINT

I hope I'm not coming across as a bully or a know-it-all, as this forum is open to all voices and opinions. I welcome anybody's experience on par with my own. That said, I want to say something about the idea that crossovers are sonically superior - even at the earphone level - because they "cut down on distortion."

If we were talking about dedicated woofers and dedicated tweeters, I'd hail such a view. If we were talking about large amount of wattage, I'd double-hail it. But as these are wide-range drivers, designed to play high and low, I just don't buy it. What's more, because of the low wattage involved, I just don't see - or hear - what all the fuss is about. My UM3Xs do sound better than my single-driver Audeos, but the most obvious difference was in the HF. The TWFK simply extends higher than the single-driver Phonak PFEs. If you listen to the CIs and listen to the TWFKs separately, you'll hear surprisingly versatile sound out of both, but the TWFK will capture that HF sizzle noticeably better - with or without a crossover. The CI, however, has a noticeably higher output. Unfiltered, it sounds louder at the watts than the TWFK. If, on the other hand, you muffle the CI with a filter, the two balance out quite well. What's more, because a filter lets you mechanically target the HF, you can enhance LF, if that's what you're going for.

But here's the kicker. Even if you argue that the TWFK sounds cleaner with the addition of a crossover (no such crossover is applied to the CI, even though it's supposed to limit itself to the lower range), you have to weigh that argument against the fact that micro-sized caps and resistors - especially the tantalums - have the worst reputation for sonic purity. The use of any cap or resistor adds distortion. There's now war around it. But the tantalums are the worst. Their virtue is their size, not their quality as audio components. If I have to choose between placing these components between me and my music AND using bifurcated filters of different gauges, you can guess which way I'm going to go.

 

[FYJX]

I don't by your views on crossovers, not going to say you're wrong cause i understand where you are coming from. However, the point of a crossover is to limit the load and focus a driver on a part of the frequency. Yes, most balanced armature drivers like the TWFK and the CI are basically full range drivers that don't have problem reproducing a reasonable frequency range with a fair amount of performance. However, if we plug in a crossover it reduces what the driver has to do meaning it doens't have to worry as much. For example, we as humans can multi-task. Yes we can watch TV, do our work and talk to people at the same time, but if we limit ourselves to one thing then we're bond to d it better.

Yes caps and resistors are the terror of audio reproduction, but if we plug in a electric crossover like Klipsch uses on their Custom 3, then it's not a problem at all.

I do agree that a high driver, mid driver and low driver should each receive their own filters to allow a significant improvement on the audio part, however i'm sure you yourself have noticed that a triple bore with triple filters is near impossible to fit into a universal earpiece with all the strain relief, crossover circuit board and so on.

 

[Clutz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaoDi /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't by your views on crossovers, not going to say you're wrong cause i understand where you are coming from. However, the point of a crossover is to limit the load and focus a driver on a part of the frequency. Yes, most balanced armature drivers like the TWFK and the CI are basically full range drivers that don't have problem reproducing a reasonable frequency range with a fair amount of performance. However, if we plug in a crossover it reduces what the driver has to do meaning it doens't have to worry as much. For example, we as humans can multi-task. Yes we can watch TV, do our work and talk to people at the same time, but if we limit ourselves to one thing then we're bond to d it better.

Your analogy between humans multi-tasking and balanced armatures multitasking may not be fair. It may be true that full range drivers work better when they are tuned to working in a specific frequency range through the use of crossovers, but it isn't necessarily true a full range driver will do a better job if the range of frequencies it's given to handle is limited.

On the other hand, while the use of crossovers can limit certain frequency ranges to particular drivers, cross overs do introduce other problems- notably- phase distortion.

In fact, many DIY speaker makers prefer using single full range drivers to a multi-driver set of specifically because of the problems that are introduced using crossovers.

 

[FYJX]

It may be true, but through my personal experience and tests that i have done on armature drivers. That may not be the case. I have found that the CI and ED drivers perform at least a margin better when limited to a specific frequency. They offered a faster transient in sound reproduction. Word syllables and drum fills were more clear, and distinct compared to no crossover as the armature/diaphragm doesn't have to recover from another frequency tone. But hey, that doesn't mean that the drivers aren't nice as full-range drivers themselves,

Yes there can be phase distortion in a crossover circuitry when the filters phasing is off. Which can be if the crossover circuitry isn't tuned properly, or made properly. The bigger problem with crossovers i find is that there can be "blank" spots in the frequencies, as the split isn't exact. Meaning there's a certain frequency range that the drivers inline don't reproduce. JH Audio themselves have covered this problem but simply having one driver playing the whole frequency rather than just a specific frequency. This is also what i have done with the two upcoming monitors that i have designed.